Home | Community | Message Board

Cannabis Seeds - Original Sensible Seeds
This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.


Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Shop: North Spore Bulk Substrate   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   Kraken Kratom Red Vein Kratom   PhytoExtractum Maeng Da Thai Kratom Leaf Powder   Original Sensible Seeds Autoflowering Cannabis Seeds

Jump to first unread post Pages: 1 | 2  [ show all ]
Offlinenugsarenice
Carpal Tunnel
Registered: 06/04/00
Posts: 3,442
Loc: nowhere
Last seen: 18 years, 5 months
Economic Policy made to support poverty in Hawaii
    #627698 - 05/12/02 10:11 AM (21 years, 9 months ago)

So I was looking over some statistics, and I found out that only 30 percent of the food consumed in Hawaii is made in Hawaii, the rest is imported. Hawaii has plenty of availabe land though. This is in no way a strong economic policy. If you look at other islands like Hainan, they export food to the mainland. The annual salary there is 1000 dollars, or 8000 yuan, increasing steadily even with inflation, marked growth, while Hawaii suffers from extreme poverty, expecially with native hawaiians. The average salary here I guess is less then or 7000 dollars, which is an average salary in Maryland, but Hawaii costs more to live in because food is imported all they way from Italy, Spain, and the U.S., China. The government has long geared the economy towards tourism, but everyone knows that aristocracy controls the Hotel Networks, and the Banking systems behind them. Leaving Hawaiian's very poor, and with a resentment towards white people. It is noted that Hainan has a very high increase in tourism the same as Taiwan, while Hawaii's tourism stays the same, while the prices charged to tourists drop. It is possible for Hawaii to be self sufficient with food now, with a population of 1,000,000, but the politicians do not favor a policy like the one I suggest, but with governer campaigns approaching one candidate is sure to support a strong agriculture policy.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleInnvertigo
Vote Libertarian!!
Male

Registered: 02/08/01
Posts: 16,296
Loc: Crackerville, Michigan U...
Re: Economic Policy made to support poverty in Hawaii [Re: nugsarenice]
    #629934 - 05/14/02 04:23 AM (21 years, 9 months ago)

***So I was looking over some statistics***

care to post these "stats"?

****Hawaii has plenty of availabe land though****

no they don't..who told you this?

****The annual salary there is 1000 dollars, or 8000 yuan, increasing steadily even with inflation, marked growth, while Hawaii suffers from extreme poverty****

Who in the hell told you this? Do you know how expensive realestate is in Hawaii? Just because you're poor doesn't mean everyone's the same. A Hawaii does not and i repeat does not suffer from extreme poverty...you're starting to make less and less sense as your post go on.

****The average salary here I guess is less then or 7000 dollars, which is an average salary in Maryland****

God, your getting worse by the moment

****Hawaii costs more to live in because food is imported all they way from Italy, Spain, and the U.S., China. ****

Not to mention building materials, textiles and electronics

i've tried to contain myself but it is clear that you have no idea about the real world...your posts only prove my point.



--------------------

America....FUCK YEAH!!!

Words of Wisdom: Individual Rights BEFORE Collective Rights

"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." -- Thomas Jefferson


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinenugsarenice
Carpal Tunnel
Registered: 06/04/00
Posts: 3,442
Loc: nowhere
Last seen: 18 years, 5 months
Re: Economic Policy made to support poverty in Hawaii [Re: Innvertigo]
    #630001 - 05/14/02 06:12 AM (21 years, 9 months ago)

I guess you visited Hawaii once, no reason to try and fool you. I do see much land everwhere I go though, that could be easily farmed with a little irrigation. Other places are so rich in soil, and rainfall, that I could just go put a fence around the plot of land, and survive, however the government would come tell me that is illegal because land needs to be regulated, to create a higher work force economy, therefore creating more taxes, therefore making the politicians who make these laws rich. Houses at minimum cost at least 300,000, your right it is too expensive to live here.

Many people who immigrate here with much money from the mainland help the economy and hire native uneducated hawaiians, and let them keep their simple lives as farmers, Hawaii is just perfect, and here I was trying to propagandize experts like yourself.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleInnvertigo
Vote Libertarian!!
Male

Registered: 02/08/01
Posts: 16,296
Loc: Crackerville, Michigan U...
Re: Economic Policy made to support poverty in Hawaii [Re: nugsarenice]
    #630065 - 05/14/02 07:22 AM (21 years, 9 months ago)

why do you post lies? you seem to think you deserve something from the government at the same time saying how currupt it is. You my slow one are a living contradiction. It seems i'm the only one who ever responds to you for reasons i'm sure you know. what are you trying to prove? You'd think after forum after forum of people telling you how ignorant you are you'd try to atleast make a subtle attempt to research something and not just pull numbers out of your ass. I don't mean to get personal but you should really look into doing research for yourself and quite relying on your obviously ignorant friends in the world bank.


--------------------

America....FUCK YEAH!!!

Words of Wisdom: Individual Rights BEFORE Collective Rights

"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." -- Thomas Jefferson


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Anonymous

Re: Economic Policy made to support poverty in Hawaii [Re: Innvertigo]
    #630293 - 05/14/02 09:45 AM (21 years, 9 months ago)

i hate having to agree with you...

but come on, 7000 the average annual salary in maryland?? thats just bullshit.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinemrfreedom
journeyman
Male
Registered: 11/21/01
Posts: 80
Last seen: 7 years, 4 months
Re: Economic Policy made to support poverty in Hawaii [Re: ]
    #630520 - 05/14/02 12:52 PM (21 years, 9 months ago)

You are right peach; this link shows the average disposable income in Maryland in 1998. Go about half way down the page. The average for Maryland was:
$52,040

http://cl.k12.md.us/BOE/econdemo.html


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinefelix
 User Gallery

Registered: 01/20/00
Posts: 10,503
Last seen: 1 month, 18 days
Re: Economic Policy made to support poverty in Hawaii [Re: Innvertigo]
    #630908 - 05/14/02 07:00 PM (21 years, 9 months ago)

exactly....


--------------------
Real botanists laugh at HPS systems, we do however use high pressure sodium in the parking lot. - artthug


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleInnvertigo
Vote Libertarian!!
Male

Registered: 02/08/01
Posts: 16,296
Loc: Crackerville, Michigan U...
Re: Economic Policy made to support poverty in Hawaii [Re: felix]
    #631175 - 05/15/02 03:02 AM (21 years, 9 months ago)

I thought i was the only one who felt this way


--------------------

America....FUCK YEAH!!!

Words of Wisdom: Individual Rights BEFORE Collective Rights

"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." -- Thomas Jefferson


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinenugsarenice
Carpal Tunnel
Registered: 06/04/00
Posts: 3,442
Loc: nowhere
Last seen: 18 years, 5 months
Re: Economic Policy made to support poverty in Hawaii [Re: ]
    #631323 - 05/15/02 06:37 AM (21 years, 9 months ago)

It was probraly just the black people, being that I'm white, I don't know how I got mixed up with all the black politics. My averages are in no way average, or scientific, they are based on observation. If I knew the government published a report on income, I should have just believed that.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinemrfreedom
journeyman
Male
Registered: 11/21/01
Posts: 80
Last seen: 7 years, 4 months
Re: Economic Policy made to support poverty in Hawaii [Re: nugsarenice]
    #631541 - 05/15/02 10:31 AM (21 years, 9 months ago)

Nugsarenice, I appreciate that you are only trying to bring to light that native Hawaiians(sp) suffer from abject poverty and I applaud your effort. Nonetheless, if you wish to be listened to I would suggest that you include the "statistics" that you quote. Otherwise, your information will be nothing more than an opinion without supporting evidence.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinenugsarenice
Carpal Tunnel
Registered: 06/04/00
Posts: 3,442
Loc: nowhere
Last seen: 18 years, 5 months
Re: Economic Policy made to support poverty in Hawaii [Re: mrfreedom]
    #631653 - 05/15/02 11:50 AM (21 years, 9 months ago)

I often go into deep meditation with the internet, and read about every article there is available on the subject, but if you want my honest opinion on where I found that fact about land usage, and food, I think I found it at a website discussing the economy of the Island of Hainan, and they compared it to Hawaii. My qoute about tourists amounts visiting the same, and prices dropping to sell to the tourists, that comes directly from the State Newspaper. If you want my fact about native Hawaiians being poor, you only need to talk to a couple of Hawaiians, actually any Hawaiian, you might even look up some information on Hawaii, as there are several organizations that promote Hawaiian independence from America. Also every Hawaiian who I have informed of these facts ( I mean older educated businessman) have only agreed with my philosophy, in no why did they dispute what I said. So if you are really interested in verifying what I said, you should look up information about the economy of Hainan, and you might be able to find it. I don't need to prove it, but I can summarzie what I found out during meditation. Finally, any locally hawaiian produced food costs more to buy, then imported food, because? If the Hawaiians could lower the prices to compete with imports, don't you think they would want to? It is business, anyone can see it, the politicians are taking kick backs, from Mainland businessman, expecially rice farmers in California,, who employ mexicans at slave wages.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Anonymous

Re: Economic Policy made to support poverty in Hawaii [Re: nugsarenice]
    #631745 - 05/15/02 12:48 PM (21 years, 9 months ago)

...there are several organizations that promote Hawaiian independence from America.
Hey, I'm all for the right to secede. Do you think the Empire would allow it?

...expecially rice farmers in California,, who employ mexicans at slave wages.
Yeah, that explains why they risk life and limb to illegally enter the country, just so they can receive slave wages to send back to their families in Mexico. News Flash : slaves don't receive wages. We don't see Americans heading south in droves for a better lifestyle, now do we?


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinenugsarenice
Carpal Tunnel
Registered: 06/04/00
Posts: 3,442
Loc: nowhere
Last seen: 18 years, 5 months
Re: Economic Policy made to support poverty in Hawaii [Re: ]
    #631828 - 05/15/02 01:50 PM (21 years, 9 months ago)

slave wages , I think that is a metaphor, anyways, I only guess that they are being paid under the table, because the rice is so cheap, but yeah, no rice is locally grown here for commercial use..

Wait a minute, so all the war veterans don't go to mexico for a better life style?


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineEchoVortex
(hard) member
Registered: 02/06/02
Posts: 859
Last seen: 15 years, 4 months
Re: Economic Policy made to support poverty in Hawaii [Re: ]
    #632029 - 05/15/02 04:15 PM (21 years, 9 months ago)

Evolving writes:

"We don't see Americans heading south in droves for a better lifestyle, now do we?"

No, not in droves, but some do go (ask pinksharkmark why he went south--he's a Canadian but I suppose that loosely counts as "American").
Have you seen how the wealthy live in Latin America? Villas, servants, politicians in your back pocket, nice weather--now that's what I call a "lifestyle"! All at reasonable prices. It doesn't make for much of a society, and they don't contribute jack shit to the furtherance of the world's fund of scientific knowledge, but they DO know how to enjoy the finer things. Americans certainly know how to make money, but they don't have anything over the rest of the world in actually knowing how to live : corporate rat race, broken homes, broken communities, urban blight, suburban sprawl, the collapse of civility and integrity, depression rates through the roof.

Ah, all that money yet happiness still elusive . . .


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Anonymous

Re: Economic Policy made to support poverty in Hawaii [Re: EchoVortex]
    #632234 - 05/15/02 06:42 PM (21 years, 9 months ago)

Sounds like you need to get out of the city. Large population centers are where the organic nature of society, community and morality has been largely replaced by top down control and a central authority, and that just doesn't work well. Hence, the decay that you refer to.

Those that think that money can buy happiness are equally as foolish as those who think that money is the root of all evil.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinenugsarenice
Carpal Tunnel
Registered: 06/04/00
Posts: 3,442
Loc: nowhere
Last seen: 18 years, 5 months
Re: Economic Policy made to support poverty in Hawaii [Re: EchoVortex]
    #632485 - 05/16/02 02:58 AM (21 years, 9 months ago)

Americans move south to support the concept of assimilation, our government in cooperation with other governments offers a good exchange so to encourage asssimilation of culture to that of the english. Maybe...


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleInnvertigo
Vote Libertarian!!
Male

Registered: 02/08/01
Posts: 16,296
Loc: Crackerville, Michigan U...
Re: Economic Policy made to support poverty in Hawaii [Re: nugsarenice]
    #632613 - 05/16/02 05:19 AM (21 years, 9 months ago)

maybe not....


--------------------

America....FUCK YEAH!!!

Words of Wisdom: Individual Rights BEFORE Collective Rights

"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." -- Thomas Jefferson


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineEchoVortex
(hard) member
Registered: 02/06/02
Posts: 859
Last seen: 15 years, 4 months
Re: Economic Policy made to support poverty in Hawaii [Re: ]
    #633427 - 05/16/02 04:22 PM (21 years, 9 months ago)

Saying that anything, whether it be money or "central authority" or anything else, is the root of all evil is indeed reductive foolishness. Central authority works pretty well for the military, as well as for many corporations. And what "central authority" has to do with big cities is beyond me; I certainly feel "Big Brother" breathing down my neck a lot less here than I would in some small hick town with prying eyes and a nasty sheriff.

Furthermore, bland and homogenous suburbs are hardly sterling examples of the "organic nature of society, community, and morality." I would prefer the neighborhoods of New York to the gated communities of Greenwich any day.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Anonymous

Re: Economic Policy made to support poverty in Hawaii [Re: EchoVortex]
    #633649 - 05/16/02 07:16 PM (21 years, 9 months ago)

Did I get your dander up by saying something about central authority? I know I never said that it is the root of all evil.

What I was alluding to is the fact that as we in America come to rely more and more on the government to replace the functions that have been traditionally performed by families and communities, we have seen a concurrent decay in the society. The schools systems are now expected to provide breakfast, lunch and morality to our children, while academics takes a back seat to attempts to form politically correct social values. Parental authority is being displaced by bureaucratic edicts. Incentives are provided by governments which make it easy for men to shirk the responsibilities of parenthood, leading to the increase of single parent households. The enforced morality of the war on drugs puts men in prison, creating more single parent families and extending (or starting) the cycle of dependency.

Meanwhile, homeschoolers, religious communities and anyone else who wants to live by their own values (not the government approved set) are treated as second class citizens and increasingly threatened with government intrusion into their lives, even to the point of violence.

You may prefer to live in the neighborhoods of New York, others in the gated communities of Greenwich, or some in the suburbs, or some in a small town. I don't understand why you speak so derisively about those lifestyles choices which differ from your preference. Maybe you'd like to be in charge of a central authority which would make them conform to your standards?


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflinePhred
Fred's son
Male

Registered: 10/18/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 9 years, 1 month
Re: Economic Policy made to support poverty in Haw [Re: ]
    #633746 - 05/16/02 09:37 PM (21 years, 9 months ago)

evolving writes:

What I was alluding to is the fact that as we in America come to rely more and more on the government to replace the functions that have been traditionally performed by families and communities, we have seen a concurrent decay in the society.

Ah, but you see, that's okay, because that is what the majority wants. And what the majority says is right, IS right. What was right a century ago isn't right today. As a matter of fact, what was right twenty years ago isn't right today. Things are different now. Now we have computers and MTV. Things today are far too complex for the average joe to be able to figure out how to survive, so the government has to step in. We must use a prudent pragmatism to decide what people are allowed to do, or they'll hurt themselves.

All the countries in the free world do things that way now, because the balanced system of free enterprise combined with government oversight has been found by the industrialized world, from a very long process of trial and error, to be most effective.

The enforced morality of the war on drugs puts men in prison, creating more single parent families and extending (or starting) the cycle of dependency.

But the majority of people support the war on drugs, so the culprit here is not the government, but the drug taker. Society never gave those people the right to take drugs, so they can't complain when they get locked away and are stripped of their right to vote.

Meanwhile, homeschoolers, religious communities and anyone else who wants to live by their own values (not the government approved set) are treated as second class citizens and increasingly threatened with government intrusion into their lives, even to the point of violence.

Of course they are threatened with government intrusion! That is as it should be. People don't have the right to live that way if the majority says they don't. How do human beings get rights in the first place? What magic or alchemy brings this about? Rights emanate from society. They certainly don't emanate from nature. I find it amazing that, as someone so concerned with rights, you have thought so little about their fundamental justification.

Maybe you'd like to be in charge of a central authority which would make them conform to your standards?

They're not just MY standards, they are the standards of society this week. Those standards were legislated by politicians elected by a majority, politicians who understand that the Constitution mustn't stand in the way of the will of the majority. The world has changed since the Constitution was written, and the principles it embodies are now irrelevant. It makes no sense to follow basic principles anyway when it comes to government. Trial and error is the most pragmatic way to do it, based on empirical evidence and statistics. And statistics show that the War on Drugs is working. As a matter of fact, it's working so well that we must increase taxes to make it work even better.

Besides, if those people don't like those standards, they can always move to another country. As soon as they get out of prison for smoking weed, of course.

*** WHUH? Ummm... where am I? ****

Damn, I just woke up from this horrible nightmare. I was trapped in some kind of warped vortex, unable to do anything but echo the opinions of those around me. I couldn't think for myself at all! It was almost as if I were someone else entirely...

It was pretty scary, but I'm back now.

Was I talking in my sleep, too?

pinky


--------------------


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Anonymous

Re: Economic Policy made to support poverty in Haw [Re: Phred]
    #633958 - 05/17/02 05:16 AM (21 years, 9 months ago)

ROFLOL


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineEchoVortex
(hard) member
Registered: 02/06/02
Posts: 859
Last seen: 15 years, 4 months
Re: Economic Policy made to support poverty in Haw [Re: Phred]
    #636166 - 05/19/02 07:03 AM (21 years, 9 months ago)

And what the majority says is right, IS right.
Things today are far too complex for the average joe to be able to figure out how to survive, so the government has to step in.
But the majority of people support the war on drugs, so the culprit here is not the government, but the drug taker. Society never gave those people the right to take drugs, so they can't complain when they get locked away and are stripped of their right to vote.
People don't have the right to live that way if the majority says they don't.
They're not just MY standards, they are the standards of society this week. Those standards were legislated by politicians elected by a majority, politicians who understand that the Constitution mustn't stand in the way of the will of the majority.
And statistics show that the War on Drugs is working. As a matter of fact, it's working so well that we must increase taxes to make it work even better.


Pinky:
The above are statements that you attribute to me which I didn't make. You intersperse them with direct quotations from my previous posts, never bothering to distinguish one from the other. This is utter intellectual dishonesty, pure and simple, and shows you up to be simply pathetic, a middle-aged autodidact who fancies himself the intellectual but should stick to making bowls.

Never once, for example, did I support the War on Drugs, I just made a point about crack dealers selling their wares in front of elementary schools. But to your crude and reductionist way of thinking, anybody who recognizes the necessity of taxation and government regulation of industry MUST support the drug war. Obviously you've never heard of the Netherlands, where a very lax drug policy coexists alongiside a welfare state.

And what did this thread have to do with you, anyway? Every time evolving gets in trouble you come riding in your horse, guns blazing. How ironic that you rugged individualists can't seem to go it alone.





Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinemrfreedom
journeyman
Male
Registered: 11/21/01
Posts: 80
Last seen: 7 years, 4 months
Re: Economic Policy made to support poverty in Haw [Re: Phred]
    #636270 - 05/19/02 08:36 AM (21 years, 9 months ago)

Pinksharkmark, I see you are from the Dominican Republic; thats good, for a minute I couldn't grasp how you could be so completely wrong in your support of societal structure in the US. I understand now, you don't live here and haven't studied the TRUE nature of the bill of rights or the constitution.

I have post relating to the MAJORITY in this forum under "thoughts on philosohpy of government"; I would include the link but I don't have it right now.

Perhaps you could post your thoughts there.



Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Anonymous

Re: Economic Policy made to support poverty in Haw [Re: EchoVortex]
    #636374 - 05/19/02 10:13 AM (21 years, 9 months ago)

Every time evolving gets in trouble you come riding in your horse, guns blazing.
Huh?

How ironic that you rugged individualists can't seem to go it alone.
You don't get it. It's about individual freedom as opposed to being subject to force or the threat of force by any individual or group of individuals.

We are supporters of individual liberty, granted we lack the herd instinct of the average domesticated primate or the desire to live parasitically off of others. Neither do we advocate the control of our fellow human beings via the mechanism of the state (so as to give coercion and violence an air of legitimacy). We ask nothing more than to be left to free run our own lives and we wish the same for all others. That really seems to bother some people.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflinePhred
Fred's son
Male

Registered: 10/18/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 9 years, 1 month
Re: Economic Policy made to support poverty in Haw [Re: mrfreedom]
    #636456 - 05/19/02 11:38 AM (21 years, 9 months ago)

mrfreedom writes:

...you don't live here and haven't studied the TRUE nature of the bill of rights or the constitution.

I have studied both and understand the true nature of both, probably better than the majority of native-born Americans posting in this forum. It's a shame so many legislators (and those who elect them) lack even the most passing acquaintance with either. See "The Great Debate" for my REAL views on the subject. In that last post I was pretending to be "Echovortex". Please pardon my levity.

I have post relating to the MAJORITY in this forum under "thoughts on philosohpy of government"

Yes, I read your post, and agree wholeheartedly with it. Excellent post.

Perhaps you could post your thoughts there.

I post frequently in this forum. I am accustomed to being called a reductionist parrot of Randian dogmatism, a heartless brute with no compassion, a close-minded fascist, etc. If you continue to post along the lines you have been, you will likely be a recipient of the same epithets.

Welcome aboard.

pinky



--------------------


Edited by pinksharkmark (05/19/02 11:41 AM)


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineEchoVortex
(hard) member
Registered: 02/06/02
Posts: 859
Last seen: 15 years, 4 months
Re: Economic Policy made to support poverty in Haw [Re: ]
    #636462 - 05/19/02 11:47 AM (21 years, 9 months ago)

I couldn't care less what you do in the privacy of your home, and you're certainly free (and should be) to place that home wherever you wish. My point of contention in previous threads was that taxation per se is not a violation of human rights, as Libertarians insist. I don't enjoy paying taxes, but I recognize the necessity of some sort of government to protect individuals from harm from other individuals, and just as importantly, from private organizations that have a tendency, once they reach a certain critical mass, to exercise power that even a government would envy. I also don't buy the proposition that government can reliably raise those revenues in other ways. As far as your tax dollars going to support parasites goes, I suggest you direct your ire at corporations such as Enron, which hasn't paid federal taxes in over five years. This type of corporate welfare eats into the government coffers at a much faster clip than the anemic US welfare system for low-income families. Although I'm sure you imagine all welfare recipients to be able-bodied young crack addicts, the fact is that most of it goes to feed children who would otherwise starve because their fucked up parents can't get their acts together. I can understand your condemnation of their parents, but I would rather see those kids get fed and educated with my tax money than see it going into the Swiss account of some crook at Enron. Now, I can imagine you'll say that if that's the case I could just give the money to them directly. I can do that as well, and I do, but I also know that private donations alone are not enough, just as they weren't enough at the turn of the century, when vulture capitalism was rampant.

As far as rights go, they are only an issue in the context of a society. A person living by him or herself in the middle of nowhere doesn't need rights because his or her actions have no consequences for others. Rights are meaningless in this context. When an individual is a part of society, however, his rights need to be protected from others. I think we agree up to this point. Regardless of the metaphysical justifications for those rights, they will de facto not be protected unless enough people with enough power agree that they should be. How those decisions are made varies from society to society, everything on the scale from a one-man dictatorship to a purely democratic commune. The crux is that these are socially determined decisions, and if a given society decides that certain responsibilities attend to those rights then one can either play the game by those rules, work within the system to change the rules, or leave the society altogether. It's a give and take. If you just want to take-take-take, don't be surprised that most people write your political stance off. The ability to produce wealth depends on infrastructure, education to create knowledge, a consumer base, and social stability. Tax money goes to create and maintain that infrastructure and stability without raising the issue of profits, and taxes are the price one is expected to pay to have access to that infrastructure and its wealth-generating possibilities. Perhaps if you have a pre-industrial vocation like pinky does you can still generate income in a poor country without infrastructure. But the industrial and information revolutions have changed the face of society in terribly profound ways (I'm not saying necessarily for the better) and if one cannot understand that public infrastructure and education are necessary to maintain such a society, then one is genuinely living in a world of delusion.

Do I approve of everything the government of the United States does? No, not at all. I'm certainly not a supporter of the drug war as I enjoy soft drugs as much as the next guy. But simply because I approve of an adult's right to choose what to place in his own body doesn't mean I support a crack dealer's right to set up shop in front of an elementary school, as a Libertarian would. The problem with the Libertarian position is that it poses the problem as an absolute either/or proposition. This admittedly has a certain philosophical elegance but in the final analysis it is an oversimplified absurdity. There is harm and there is potential harm, and I don't see the point in giving every loon and every corporation out there the right to do potential harm. Blind people shouldn't be allowed to drive cars, violent offenders shouldn't have the right to own firearms, and maniacs shouldn't have the right to sell drugs to kids telling them it's candy. In a Libertarian world they would have those rights and this is only the beginning of the list of absurdities that would ensue. A person for whom political philosophy isn't just a from of onanism would realize that.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflinePhred
Fred's son
Male

Registered: 10/18/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 9 years, 1 month
Re: Economic Policy made to support poverty in Haw [Re: EchoVortex]
    #636580 - 05/19/02 02:02 PM (21 years, 9 months ago)

Echovortex writes:

The above are statements that you attribute to me which I didn't make. You intersperse them with direct quotations from my previous posts, never bothering to distinguish one from the other.

They are not direct quotes, true. But all are consistent with and follow logically from statements you have made here.

This is utter intellectual dishonesty, pure and simple...

The fact that you see no connection between my tongue-in-cheek statements and your own viewpoint demonstrates utter intellectual obtuseness.

Never once, for example, did I support the War on Drugs, I just made a point about crack dealers selling their wares in front of elementary schools.

Which illustrates neatly said obtuseness. In a society where drugs are not illegal, there would be no crack dealers.

But to your crude and reductionist way of thinking, anybody who recognizes the necessity of taxation and government regulation of industry...

Necessity? Neither has been proven necessary. It is YOUR opinion that both are necessary. I (and others) say neither is.

... and shows you up to be simply pathetic, a middle-aged...

I can no more change my age than you can change yours.

... autodidact...

The financial situation of my parents was such that a university education was out of the question, so yes, I am an autodidact.

... who fancies himself the intellectual...

I hardly consider myself an intellectual. None of the ideas I espouse here require much mental agility to grasp. They are common sense.

... but should stick to making bowls.

I have both made bowls and managed proficiently the largest, most profitable division of the top computer reseller in Canada. Can you do either?

As for "pathetic" -- I limit my comments to the validity of the IDEAS you espouse rather than taking shots at who you ARE. I leave it to the readers to decide which of us is the more pathetic.

And what did this thread have to do with you, anyway?

It was my understanding that any member who had opinions on a topic under discussion was free to air them. I must have missed the rule that states "By Invitation Only".

pinky


--------------------


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineEchoVortex
(hard) member
Registered: 02/06/02
Posts: 859
Last seen: 15 years, 4 months
Re: Economic Policy made to support poverty in Haw [Re: Phred]
    #636673 - 05/19/02 03:17 PM (21 years, 9 months ago)

"They are not direct quotes, true. But all are consistent with and follow logically from statements you have made here."

How does it follow that I believe the majority is always right? If anything the majority is usually wrong. My point was that rights are protected by society and therefore, in a real sense, issue from society. This has nothing to do with whether society knows what it is doing. It's an unfortunate state of affairs, but it is reality. I also never said that life is too complex for average Joes to figure out how to survive. My point was to something more sinister: there are many people who will rip off and exploit and endanger the lives of their fellows just to make a buck, and only a body (the state) sovereign to those people can stop them and/or punish them for doing so.

"Which illustrates neatly said obtuseness. In a society where drugs are not illegal, there would be no crack dealers."

And why would that be? Because selling drugs would be the monopoly of the state? What kind of Libertarian are you? Or because high-grade cocaine would be more affordable so people wouldn't bother with crack? Once again you exhibit the typical Libertarian "wave-the-wand" syndrome: once a Libertarian society is in place, all problems automatically take care of themselves. Oh, and don't forget about the tooth fairy.

"Necessity? Neither has been proven necessary. It is YOUR opinion that both are necessary. I (and others) say neither is"

Once again, the burden of proof is on you, a burden you have not carried, so I for one see no reason to change my opinion.

"I have both made bowls and managed proficiently the largest, most profitable division of the top computer reseller in Canada. Can you do either?"

This is a pointless exercise. Does it matter? Anybody can say they can do anything on these anonymous forums. "Do you know who I am? I'm Spider-Man!"

"I limit my comments to the validity of the IDEAS you espouse rather than taking shots at who you ARE. I leave it to the readers to decide which of us is the more pathetic."

Who do you think you're kidding? Your little gag post ("I couldn't think for myself at all!") was very much a shot at who I AM, and one which had nothing to do with my post in this thread. It was clearly an upsurge of residual resentment. My response to evolving was aimed at his desire to have his Libertarian cake and eat his Patriotic cake ("you don't see Americans going south . . ." ) too. I was hoping you two could start a constructive dialogue about how the Dominican Republic has learned from the US's mistakes, is closer to a Libertarian society, and is therefore superior/preferable.

In any event, this too is a pointless exercise. What do I care whether readers of this forum think you or I or Mr. Magoo are pathetic or not? This is cyberspace, buddy. None of this is real.



Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinemrfreedom
journeyman
Male
Registered: 11/21/01
Posts: 80
Last seen: 7 years, 4 months
Re: Economic Policy made to support poverty in Haw [Re: Phred]
    #636808 - 05/19/02 05:18 PM (21 years, 9 months ago)

Wheewww, that was close, thanks Pink for being so nice to me. As usual, I jumped in without knowing the nature of the posters. I just got hammered on another board, because I didn't know that one of the members was engaging in "levity".

I only read the first page of the link, I will go back and read the rest, but, to be blunt, I find economic, political arguments, with ignorant (NOT STUPID; I am not calling anyone stupid, look up the definition of "ignorant" before you hurt your fingers flaming me) persons. No matter how well intentioned, they always revert to dogma, instead of relating their logic to historical, political, philosophical, sociological or rational arguments.

On the matter at hand, without trying to be disagreable (to late); I must confess some consternation that this post has proceeded far from it's original. The post started out as a memeber's attempt to broaden our knowledge on the plight of our sister state Hawaii. This member's "factual" evidence was greatly lacking, and so the degeneration of the post inssued.

I am also guilty of this, considering my reply, before this one. I apologize for this, I moderate other boards and I would have been the first in line to say don't stray to far off-topic, we already have an off-topic forum.

I propose, considering the nature of where we have begun to go, that, one or the other of you: Pink or Echo, PLEASE, take the time to write a position and post it in as a new post.

For our own sake, since the moderators, are very loose on the subject, I would suggest that we continue the debate in the new vein, and RESPECT the ORIGINAL nature of the post (this one) as intended by the person who posted.

What do you say?
Pretty please.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinenugsarenice
Carpal Tunnel
Registered: 06/04/00
Posts: 3,442
Loc: nowhere
Last seen: 18 years, 5 months
Re: Economic Policy made to support poverty in Haw [Re: mrfreedom]
    #636817 - 05/19/02 05:26 PM (21 years, 9 months ago)

Hey thanks, I appreciate it, you guys just started talking for pages,without really saying anything, I kept on coming back hopefully expecting someone had replied to my post, but then it was just a bunch of bullcrap about nothing, I don't even think you could categorize alll your guys debate to be put under a name in a new post!



Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflinePhred
Fred's son
Male

Registered: 10/18/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 9 years, 1 month
Re: Economic Policy made to support poverty in Haw [Re: mrfreedom]
    #636889 - 05/19/02 06:36 PM (21 years, 9 months ago)

Good point. Done. You can follow it here if you wish.

pinky


--------------------


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: 1 | 2  [ show all ]

Shop: North Spore Bulk Substrate   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   Kraken Kratom Red Vein Kratom   PhytoExtractum Maeng Da Thai Kratom Leaf Powder   Original Sensible Seeds Autoflowering Cannabis Seeds


Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* GOP economic policy, a ticking timebomb?
( 1 2 3 4 all )
Ellis Dee 4,966 65 11/07/05 10:04 AM
by Silversoul
* Will we finally get to see if "conservative" policy helps poverty? Catalysis 362 1 09/15/05 09:38 PM
by LeftyBurnz
* Declining Support for Bush
( 1 2 3 all )
Innvertigo 4,983 50 04/17/02 09:40 AM
by Innvertigo
* Socio-Economic Systems in Different Countries Silversoul 527 5 02/17/05 11:21 AM
by Silversoul
* Bush losing re-election support? adrug 1,820 14 09/28/03 11:34 PM
by SquattingMarmot
* Liberal economics=Herbert Hoover economics... Ellis Dee 800 1 01/16/02 06:30 PM
by carbonhoots
* Kerry's economic isolationism Phred 504 0 10/19/04 01:36 PM
by Phred
* welfare/poverty
( 1 2 all )
JonnyOnTheSpot 2,731 21 06/13/03 02:21 AM
by Xlea321

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Enlil, ballsalsa
4,071 topic views. 0 members, 4 guests and 11 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2024 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.039 seconds spending 0.011 seconds on 14 queries.