Comments on: A new beginning for Libya http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2011/10/20/a-new-beginning-for-libya/ Thu, 21 Jul 2016 07:57:19 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=4.2.5 By: OneOfTheSheep http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2011/10/20/a-new-beginning-for-libya/#comment-39024 Mon, 31 Oct 2011 03:07:01 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=10745#comment-39024 Paintcan,

There is a limit to the time I can spend here with you and it’s over. Try to hold the ramblings above that spring forth from nowhere and sprinkle them in as appropriate in future debate.

‘bye

]]>
By: OneOfTheSheep http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2011/10/20/a-new-beginning-for-libya/#comment-39023 Mon, 31 Oct 2011 03:02:06 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=10745#comment-39023 Renox,

I don’t follow threads that look like they’re dead long; but now that I’ve read your latest pearls of wisdom, I just had to comment.

You said: “Your chances of dying in a car accident or walking around in the wrong part of town in Memphis or Stockton is a thousand times higher than being killed by a terrorist attack.

That’s actually quite true. But once again, you have your eye on the “wrong ball”. Terrorists want the biggest possible “bang for the effort” in terms of lives, publicity and effect on the victim country or regime.

So they focus their meagre resources on places like New York City, Washington, or Los Angeles. What were the odds of a terrorist attack on the Twin Towers before it happened? Just because the odds are low does not mean that Americans or their government can act as if these things can no and do not happen. The best defense has thus far proven to be a good offense…no more similarly spectacular low-budget attacks in the last decade.

I care about social justice only to the point of giving others an opportunity to success. That’s a lot easier and cheaper (and more just) than guaranteeing them success. But such may be beyond your level of comprehension.

]]>
By: paintcan http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2011/10/20/a-new-beginning-for-libya/#comment-38783 Tue, 25 Oct 2011 15:51:55 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=10745#comment-38783 oneofthesheep wrote “Your frustration is showing. Why do you live in the U.S. since you seem to hate it and all that it stands for?”

I don’t know why I missed that the first time? Why is it that so many think they have a right to revoke citizenship when they hear criticism? Two rock bottom attitudes are always living under the surface in the popular mind: Zenophobia, “they aren’t one of us”, or, “we rule the sty, get out of our trough.”

I don’t like your definition of what the US stands for and I don’t like what it has become in the past ten years. And neither would a lot of the founders of the country have liked it. Neither would a lot of people even as far back as the days of T. Roosevelt have liked it.

The robber baron years were followed by the wave of “socialist” reforms such as an income tax and numerous Good Government initiatives. It was also the time when legislation designed to break up monopolies like Standard Oil or the near monopoly of Carnegie’s steel empire, were passed. But Roosevelt was a mixed bag – his administration also saw the acquisition of the first off shore territories by the US.

BTW – re: your comment about being a master rather than a slave. No doubt you would. But Lincoln said – “As I would not be a slave, I would not be a master.” What’s so hard about that? Masters have to live with the perpetual fear that their slaves may rise up to murder them when they are asleep or too weak to tend to the chains.

If the economy can only survive on the taxpayer funded defense industry, than the jig is up already. Sure the country would be all right if it could figure out its priorities. Which ones? The world can’t seem to figure out its priorities either. I now know why Tiberius spent so much time on Capri talking to astrologers and fortunetellers. The priorities are very contradictory.

I definitely agree with Renox – the terrorist threat has been used to justify a degree of homeland surveillance that McCarthy would have envied. And that term “homeland” sprang up overnight after 9/11.

And I think an awful lot about what I write and I’m also an old man. You recite laissez faire platitudes. My last line was supposed to be “give it up”. I guess you did?

]]>
By: Renox http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2011/10/20/a-new-beginning-for-libya/#comment-38699 Sun, 23 Oct 2011 18:10:17 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=10745#comment-38699 one of the sheep

….would prefer we battle suicide bombers on American soil instead?”
Total fallacy. The so called terrorists, the Boogie men were created by Media propaganda. They might be good at waging a guerilla warfare in the middle of nowhere, but the notion that they would be capable attacking the US or Europe is proposterous. Your chances of dying in a car accident or walking around in the wrong part of town in Memphis or Stockton is a thousand times higher than being killed by a terrorist attack.

So, what do you care who rules Iraq, or Libya? Honestly, the notion of us eliminating social injustice in the world is a novel idea, but why does it seem to happen in ONLY those countries which posess natural resources we covet?

]]>
By: paintcan http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2011/10/20/a-new-beginning-for-libya/#comment-38694 Sat, 22 Oct 2011 22:22:02 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=10745#comment-38694 oneofthesheep – give it you old fool!

]]>
By: OneOfTheSheep http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2011/10/20/a-new-beginning-for-libya/#comment-38693 Sat, 22 Oct 2011 22:07:38 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=10745#comment-38693 paintcan,

You never fail to surprise in your ability to seize defeat from the jaws of victory. I shared your opinions and concerns almost word for word until your last two sentences.

You can’t debate effectively because you lack the consistency of principles necessary to be consistent. You do not seek common ground with anyone. The only purpose of your blather is to accuse others of wrongdoing and draw attention to your own pitiful self.

Too bad.

]]>
By: paintcan http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2011/10/20/a-new-beginning-for-libya/#comment-38692 Sat, 22 Oct 2011 21:40:01 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=10745#comment-38692 “They have spent more on themselves than they have earned for far too long. They have lived beyond their means. Debt is but one side of the yin and yang of any monetary system.”

That’s it in a nutshell. And the wars are the past ten years of the way a bankrupt country tries to remain a world power.

If the new Libyans have any sense they should avoid being roped into too much of the developed world’s debt trap. If they played it right they could have Gaddafi’s common sense without his brutality or grasp for power or his ideological quirks. The fact that the country could provide free education, free water, auto and housing subsidies, and Gaddafi and family could salt away billions, suggests that they could continue on that solvent standard of living, actually. They could still arouse the envy of the powers that be in as much as those powers can’t afford their imperial pretensions any longer.

Sans Gaddafi and sons they would have billions to spare even if the new government never sets eyes again on the vanished funds. How mush do you think the “honorable” legal profession in the developed countries will charge the poor bastards to ever see a fraction of it again?

But if they are a bunch of crooks or idiots, they will follow the developed countries down the short road to insolvency.

You don’t seem to recognize that you lost all the points you tried to make but insist in clothing your nakedness in homilies.

The developed world is way into the Yin. Even the Yen is in the yin. The Yuan isn’t into the yin yet. But you and yours are working on it, I’m sure!

]]>
By: OneOfTheSheep http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2011/10/20/a-new-beginning-for-libya/#comment-38685 Sat, 22 Oct 2011 17:35:05 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=10745#comment-38685 paintcan,

You don’t read or understand your own thoughts and perceptions as expressed in this thread. Your frustration is palpable throughout what you write, as is your apparent jealousy that I comprehend truths invisible to your eyes.

You seem obsessed with people in prisons. Maybe you need better role models? A productive country is that way because it functions every day.

That starts with breakfast. Society and schools do not function well or efficiently if disruptive elements are not removed. If you’re going to make an omlette, you’re going to have to break a few eggs. Bad apples in a barrel will spoil some good apples if not removed. You know that, but people who lack the conviction to do what must be done are but mere observers of history. They will never “make” history.

My explanation of global trade was to illustrate that many things once made in the U.S. for the U.S. are no longer economical to make here. The jobs such manufacturing once provided Americans are gone and they’re not coming back. Food we buy grown elsewhere we don’t grow here; so our agricultural production has to instead produce other products that the world will buy.

Capitalism does that day after day. This is it’s advantage over the socialist or communist system, which keeps on producing stuff no one wants or needs and then wonders why it doesn’t sell.

You ask why the developed world is so deep in debt? That’s easy. They have spent more on themselves than they have earned for far too long. They have lived beyond their means. Debt is but one side of the yin and yang of any monetary system.

You say you “don’t want to touch” my “notions of honorable” and purport to conclude that I “expect people to admire” me. It is obvious that emotions control your thoughts and actions. Again, I’ll try to explain logically.

When one’s goals and actions are agreed as “honorable” by an observer, admiration is the automatic and earned expression of their common values and related individual support. Those who are active participants in life understand this and the best and brightest are positively motivated by it.

Those who just drift through life, straining the crumbs left by the activity of others, live like barnacles and contribute about as much to the econiomic ecosystem. It logically follows that they would lack the understanding that comes from active mental awareness, because using one’s brain takes effort.

History is the dust of the past. It has lessons to offer, but the vitality of life springs from enthusiastically rising to meet the challenges of each new day so as to live fully and well. Those who wring their hands and whine day after day become more and more jealous day after day.

I’m sure if you tried the difference, you’d like it!

]]>
By: paintcan http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2011/10/20/a-new-beginning-for-libya/#comment-38682 Sat, 22 Oct 2011 14:42:23 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=10745#comment-38682 Oneofthesheep: NO frustration – You show a false sense of confidence.

I believe in profit too. The question is – what am I willing to do to be profitable? The Mafia believed in profits. I suppose they also appreciated capitalism.

And you confuse profit with empire building. Many people would have a problem with your very comfortable sense of entitlement. In fact many of the wrong people may be in the country’s prisons. I can think of a few who really didn’t belong there. They are not all there because they “prey” on society. The rest of that paragraph shows you are the kind of man – if the law allowed it – who would feed people to gas chambers and that you think you know who deserves to live or die. That attitude is making the rounds and why we have been engaged in ten years of continuous warfare. You are the very soul of fascism.

I am quite sure the US citizens and quite probably the rest of the world will not enjoy a rising standard of living. I am used to a small income and a small scaled standard of living. It’s not a very complicated way to live and I feel very comfortable.

In your outline of the global market – you write as though the US is the only county with fruits from South America or electronics from the Far East. What’s your point in all of that? The US didn’t invent global trade. It isn’t even getting the best of it now.

How do you explain away that the developed world is so deep in debt

I think I finally catch on that money doesn’t make the world go round – debt does. That’s why people are mentioning the word Ponzi schemes so frequently now. That debt needs servicing and it is getting harder to do. The national debt can’t be fiddled with too much or the currency becomes garbage. The real estate market collapsed because it incurred too much debt.

I don’t even want to touch you notions of “honorable”. It’s a very selective definition no doubt. Mafiosi were also obsessed with honor. Gaddafi would have believed in Honor. So did Saddam. “Honor” implies that you expect people to admire you.

I haven’t seen much to admire about the last ten years. Honor, or Vainglory, or just desperation may be hard to distinguish until the dust settles and the victims have been counted and a lot of time has passed.

History will decide whether any of the wars going on now deserved to be called honorable and neither of us might be around to hear the verdict. The future may have bigger issues to worry about than whether it got there honorably. In fact, I’m very sure it won’t care.

]]>
By: OneOfTheSheep http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2011/10/20/a-new-beginning-for-libya/#comment-38673 Sat, 22 Oct 2011 07:17:46 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=10745#comment-38673 Gee, paintcan. Your frustration is showing. Why do you live in the U.S. since you seem to hate it and all that it stands for? Nonetheless, I’ll try to explain the “ocean” thing to you.

Well into the 1950’s, America was an economic “island” surrounded by oceans expensive to cross. A lot was learned in WW II about how to ship machines and materials world wide relatively inexpensively.

Once Japan and Europe (with the help of the Marshall Plan) replaced their outdated industries destroyed in WW II with the “latest and greatest” technology, they became more and more able to provide the American “consumer market” with products of increasing quality at prices lower than products produced here.

Foreign cars became more and more popular. Soon all our television sets and many other things could be produced for much less in Japan and elsewhere than America, including shipping. Korea, Taiwan, Singapore, China, Mexico, all in turn now have a piece of manufacturing the washers, dryers, CD Players, iPods, laptops, computers, etc. in our stores today.

Even our food comes from all over the world. We LIKE having grapes and fruit from South America, etc. here in our “off season” for these things.

Increasingly, it is primarily items made for our military that are designed, built, maintained and upgraded in this country. Increasingly our in-country food production is being centralized and industrialized.

What is left in America that contributes to “gross national product” that can’t be relocated? Mostly service industries.

The alchemy and sweat of energy production, conversion, storage, transmission and/or transportation, whether by truck, train, plane, boat or pipeline comes down to taking something from or out of the land and delivering it where it needs to be. The efficient capture and use of water resources, including reclamation and purification is a similar example.

As to the unsustainable prison population of the U.S., for far too long an underclass of incompetent unmotivated “dead enders” have received government-subsidized “financial assistance” that increases with each child. Most of these children then themselves become another generation of breeders or sociopaths who take from society and do not contribute.

Those who cannot assimilate into the “civil” population must be removed from preying on it. Yes, the present measures are horribly expensive and ineffective, and they will be improved. There is no choice except when this is done and how.

Nonetheless, I remain confident that U.S. citizens will continue to enjoy an ever-rising standard of living because it is the very nature of a capitalistic system to transform rapidly from one method of success to the next no matter how great the challenge. The internet will be but one of the means of this transition, and it is only totalitarian dictators that would see benefit in its destruction.

The wise comprehend profit as necessary, empowering and transformational to society. It will be such legitimate pursuit, whether by construct or thought, that will inspire and support man’s honorable journey to his manifest destiny.

]]>