# GENERAL FORUM > IN THE NEWS >  Socialist economies are competitive

## Kärnfysikern

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?p...I&refer=europe




> Switzerland jumped from fourth place last year and Finland, Sweden, Denmark and Singapore all overtook the U.S. with Japan, Germany, the Netherlands and the U.K. rounding out the top ten in the study of 125 nations by the Geneva-based forum.


1. swiss
2. Finland
3. Sweden
4. Denmark

Now what does 2, 3 and 4 have in comon  :Big Grin:   :Wink:

----------


## RA

Sounds like more opinion than cold hard facts.



"The World Economic Forum, funded by more than 1,000 corporations and best known for its annual conference in the Swiss ski-resort of Davos, has published competitiveness reports since 1979. The rankings include grades for about 90 variables ranging from innovation to education as well as the results of a poll of 11,000 corporate executives."

----------


## Kärnfysikern

> Sounds like more opinion than cold hard facts.
> 
> 
> 
> "The World Economic Forum, funded by more than 1,000 corporations and best known for its annual conference in the Swiss ski-resort of Davos, has published competitiveness reports since 1979. The rankings include grades for about 90 variables ranging from innovation to education as well as the results of a poll of 11,000 corporate executives."


Well denmark, sweden and finland are at the top when it comes to longest lifespans, highest living standards and most educated population in the world so evidently its working  :Smilie:

----------


## napoleon

Let's not start a holy economic theory war here... Bottom line is. there are pro's and con's to each situation. 

On your particular reference to the AMerican Economy. It's being "whored" out....which in the short term creates larger profit margins, but in the long-term results in less economic viability.

There was an economist, I forgot his name but he made a relatively profound simple statement. "a country in actuality is only as strong as what it can produce and sell at a profit".

----------


## RA

hmmm, I guess we're ok...


"*The US has the largest and most technologically powerful economy in the world,* with a per capita GDP of $42,000. In this market-oriented economy, private individuals and business firms make most of the decisions, and the federal and state governments buy needed goods and services predominantly in the private marketplace. US business firms enjoy greater flexibility than their counterparts in Western Europe and Japan in decisions to expand capital plant, to lay off surplus workers, and to develop new products. At the same time, they face higher barriers to enter their rivals' home markets than foreign firms face entering US markets. US firms are at or near the forefront in technological advances, especially in computers and in medical, aerospace, and military equipment; their advantage has narrowed since the end of World War II. The onrush of technology largely explains the gradual development of a "two-tier labor market" in which those at the bottom lack the education and the professional/technical skills of those at the top and, more and more, fail to get comparable pay raises, health insurance coverage, and other benefits. Since 1975, practically all the gains in household income have gone to the top 20% of households. The response to the terrorist attacks of 11 September 2001 showed the remarkable resilience of the economy. The war in March-April 2003 between a US-led coalition and Iraq, and the subsequent occupation of Iraq, required major shifts in national resources to the military. The rise in GDP in 2004 and 2005 was undergirded by substantial gains in labor productivity. Hurricane Katrina caused extensive damage in the Gulf Coast region in August 2005, but had a small impact on overall GDP growth for the year. Soaring oil prices in 2005 and 2006 threatened inflation and unemployment, yet the economy continued to grow through mid-2006. Imported oil accounts for about two-thirds of US consumption. Long-term problems include inadequate investment in economic infrastructure, rapidly rising medical and pension costs of an aging population, sizable trade and budget deficits, and stagnation of family income in the lower economic groups. "

----------


## napoleon

Long-term problems include inadequate investment in economic infrastructure, rapidly rising medical and pension costs of an aging population, sizable trade and budget deficits, and stagnation of family income in the lower economic groups. 

You read it right there. Inadequate investment in economic infrastructure means what to you? 

Trade deficits, inevitable. But to the extent that they are now? Not wholly viable.

----------


## Phreak101

> Well denmark, sweden and finland are at the top when it comes to longest lifespans, highest living standards and most educated population in the world so evidently its working


I'm not quite sure of the demographics in Sweden, but the US is heavily bogged down by welfare, illegal immigration, a failing health care system, etc. Something tells me that if we sent every person making under 18,000 a year and every illegal mexican to Sweden, things would probably change pretty drastically.

----------


## Kärnfysikern

> I'm not quite sure of the demographics in Sweden, but the US is heavily bogged down by welfare, illegal immigration, a failing health care system, etc. Something tells me that if we sent every person making under 18,000 a year and every illegal mexican to Sweden, things would probably change pretty drastically.


sweden has a population of 9 million and one million of those are imigrants(13,3% to be exact) and a big chunk of those imigrants are unemployed and live on wellfare and so on. So we are not all blue eyes and blond hair. Sweden accept more imigrants than any other nation in the EU as far as I know.

Reason we can have the solid wellfare we have is our heavy taxes offcourse. But the nice thing is that those heavy taxes doesnt make our economy less competitive worldwide and thats the point of this thread  :Smilie:  If we lowered our taxes to american levels I assume we also would have failing healthcare and not enough money for wellfare.

----------


## scriptfactory

> I'm not quite sure of the demographics in Sweden, but the US is heavily bogged down by welfare, illegal immigration, a failing health care system, etc. *Something tells me that if we sent every person making under 18,000 a year and every illegal mexican to Sweden, things would probably change pretty drastically*.


You act like countries outside of the US don't have to deal with illegal immigration or poor people. There is a reason there are so many people in the US that make less than $18k/year (i.e. higher education in the states sucks.) There is a reason that there are 8-9 million illegals living in the US. None of the reasons for the US's shitty social system has anything to do with Sweden...

----------


## Kärnfysikern

I have to add though that I am not pleased with the mass imigration to sweden, its to many to fast.

----------


## Kärnfysikern

> You act like countries outside of the US don't have to deal with illegal immigration or poor people. *There is a reason there are so many people in the US that make less than $18k/year (i.e. higher education in the states sucks.)* There is a reason that there are 8-9 million illegals living in the US. None of the reasons for the US's shitty social system has anything to do with Sweden...



Yeah, not to mention we also have much more regulations on minimum wage ect so anyone with a job in sweden(I guess in most of EU) should be able to support themself just fine. No need for 2 or 3 jobs just to pay rent.

----------


## scriptfactory

> Yeah, not to mention we also have much more regulations on minimum wage ect so anyone with a job in sweden(I guess in most of EU) should be able to support themself just fine. *No need for 2 or 3 jobs just to pay rent*.


Yeah, I forgot about that one. Companies have been raping the US workforce for a while now.

----------


## Phreak101

> Yeah, I forgot about that one. Companies have been raping the US workforce for a while now.


That mindset is bad economics. Ask ANY economist on the planet, and they will tell you minimum wage is the bain of a productive society.

----------


## Phreak101

> You act like countries outside of the US don't have to deal with illegal immigration or poor people. There is a reason there are so many people in the US that make less than $18k/year (i.e. higher education in the states sucks.) There is a reason that there are 8-9 million illegals living in the US. None of the reasons for the US's shitty social system has anything to do with Sweden...


Name one country that has bigger immigration issues AND more immigration per year than the U.S. I'll save you the the trouble, you can't.

As for higher education, why do people across the world come to our universities if they are so shitty? We have more than half the highest rated colleges in the world here in the states. Harvard, Princeton, MIT, Cal-Tech, Duke, etc. SECONDARY education here sucks, needs a lot of improvement on math, science, and MONEY MANAGEMENT! Our higher education is the best.

Not many people in the U.S. make less than $18,000 a year, our average income per GDP is $40,000. The problem is, again, managing money. When I see someone driving a car that has rims on it that cost more than the car, it leads me to believe that people need to learn to manage their money better. It has nothing to do with companies raping the workforce. I see people everyday buying smokes with their food stamps, welfare families with big screen TV's and empty fridges, etc. It's not hard to manage money!



Why so hard on the US?

----------


## Kärnfysikern

> That mindset is bad economics. Ask ANY economist on the planet, and they will tell you minimum wage is the bain of a productive society.


So how can finland, denmark and sweden be all be in the topp 5 most competitive economies and having some of the best living standards in the world despite high minimum wages? :Hmmmm:  

If that does slow down our economic growth somewhat I am more than pleased about that tradeoff. People beeing forced to work 2-3 jobs just to survive financialy is something that doesnt belong in developed societies.




> Name one country that has bigger immigration issues AND more immigration per year than the U.S. I'll save you the the trouble, you can't.


according to this site
http://www.cis.org/articles/2001/back101.html

"_As a percentage of the U.S. population, immigrants have more than doubled, from 4.7 percent in 1970 to 10.4 percent in 2000."_

In that case there are more immigrants in sweden than in the usa...percentage wise offcourse.




> As for higher education, why do people across the world come to our universities if they are so shitty? We have more than half the highest rated colleges in the world here in the states. Harvard, Princeton, MIT, Cal-Tech, Duke, etc. SECONDARY education here sucks, needs a lot of improvement on math, science, and MONEY MANAGEMENT! Our higher education is the best.


I got to agree with you. The american big universities have the best research facilities and the most money in the world no doubt. But I doubt the quality of the undergrad education is better or worse than in the big european universities. Its just that the grad students in particular has acces to better facilities over there.





> Why so hard on the US?


I know you meant that towards script, but I started the thread only to show that high taxes and high minimum wage doesnt hinder the nordic economies  :Smilie:  Not as a america bash but. Just to show that there are certainly more humane options than the american capitalist modell since the nordic countries undoubtly take better care of those in need.

----------


## death45456

heres a good read on EU vs USA economies. all things considred, USA definitly edges out europe..thats not to say EU economy is bad, just not superior to USA. socialism isnt as efficient as capitalism.

http://www.timbro.com/euvsusa/pdf/EU_vs_USA_English.pdf

----------


## scriptfactory

> Name one country that has bigger immigration issues AND more immigration per year than the U.S. I'll save you the the trouble, you can't.


I don't think there is another country that has BIGGER immigration issues, but percentage-wise I know other countries have higher rates of illegal immigration. Still, there are like 8-9 million illegals in the US so...




> As for higher education, why do people across the world come to our universities if they are so shitty? We have more than half the highest rated colleges in the world here in the states. Harvard, Princeton, MIT, Cal-Tech, Duke, etc. SECONDARY education here sucks, needs a lot of improvement on math, science, and MONEY MANAGEMENT! Our higher education is the best.


I should have worded what I wrote differently. Of course it's great, if you have the money for it. I just think higher education should be accessible to everyone.




> Not many people in the U.S. make less than $18,000 a year, our average income per GDP is $40,000. The problem is, again, managing money. When I see someone driving a car that has rims on it that cost more than the car, it leads me to believe that people need to learn to manage their money better. It has nothing to do with companies raping the workforce. I see people everyday buying smokes with their food stamps, welfare families with big screen TV's and empty fridges, etc. It's not hard to manage money!


You see welfare families with big screen TV's and empty fridges on a regular basis? Where do you work?




> Why so hard on the US?


Because I'm a US citizen and now that I live in Europe I've realized that socialism works, and quite effectively. Of course it isn't perfect, but since life is social, doesn't it make sense for our government to be as well?

----------


## Kärnfysikern

> heres a good read on EU vs USA economies. all things considred, USA definitly edges out europe..thats not to say EU economy is bad, just not superior to USA. socialism isnt as efficient as capitalism.
> 
> http://www.timbro.com/euvsusa/pdf/EU_vs_USA_English.pdf



Thanks, going to have to read that one. Especialy since it is written by a swede  :Smilie:

----------


## Kärnfysikern

> heres a good read on EU vs USA economies. all things considred, USA definitly edges out europe..thats not to say EU economy is bad, just not superior to USA. socialism isnt as efficient as capitalism.
> 
> http://www.timbro.com/euvsusa/pdf/EU_vs_USA_English.pdf



I just read that one and it was great for someone like me that is very ignorant on economics. I dont know how accurate it is though because of that reson.

I guess it boils down to one thing. Is extensive wellfare systems, free public healthcare and so on worth a little less economic growth. IMO it is aslong as it doesnt go to far.

----------


## scriptfactory

> heres a good read on EU vs USA economies. all things considred, USA definitly edges out europe..thats not to say EU economy is bad, just not superior to USA. socialism isnt as efficient as capitalism.
> 
> http://www.timbro.com/euvsusa/pdf/EU_vs_USA_English.pdf


That article states...



> THIS REPORT IS ABOUT THE FACT that per capita GDP is lower in most of the countries of Europe than in most of the states of the USA.


First of all, they are using data from like 1998-2000 in that article. Recent figures differ. Second they are basing their claim on product purchasing power as opposed to nominal figures. The real world (and taxes) operate based on nominal figures, not PPP...




> 2005 GDP per capita (nominal)
> -------------------
> 1 Luxembourg $80,288 
> 2 Norway $64,193 
> 3 Iceland $52,764 
> 4 Switzerland $50,532 
> 5 Ireland $48,604 
> 6 Denmark $47,984 
> 7 Qatar $43,110 
> ...


Then that article does things like compare the domestic appliance ownership for the US vs. the EU without taking into account the European lifestyle. European are more likely to wash dishes by hand, hang their clothes out to dry, and cook food instead of microwave it. I don't even know why they would do a comparison on something like that, it doesn't make much sense to me.

Then they go on to compare LIVING SPACE!!! What?! There is more space in America, plain and simple. Montana has less than 1 million people living in it and yet it is larger than Germany (population ~83 million).

Overall this article is basically a sham.

----------


## Kärnfysikern

script what is nominal figures?

----------


## death45456

these numbers you give script

1 Luxembourg $80,288 
2 Norway $64,193 
3 Iceland $52,764 
4 Switzerland $50,532 
5 Ireland $48,604 
6 Denmark $47,984 
7 Qatar $43,110 
8 United States $42,000 
9 Sweden $39,694 
10 Netherlands $38,618 

are way off, go on www.cia.gov world factbook for correct gdp per capita figures, i dont know where you got those numbers from.

----------


## death45456

> Then they go on to compare LIVING SPACE!!! What?! There is more space in America, plain and simple. Montana has less than 1 million people living in it and yet it is larger than Germany (population ~83 million).
> .


they were talking about housing space, not land area.

----------


## scriptfactory

> script what is nominal figures?


Nominal figures are based on monetary currency as well as market changes. They take into account economical inflation/deflation. Real figures remove the effects of inflation from the equation and are only based on market conditions and values. Taxes, mortgages, etc. are all based on nominal values.

----------


## scriptfactory

> are way off, go on www.cia.gov world factbook for correct gdp per capita figures, i dont know where you got those numbers from.


Because we all know the CIA World Factbook is the best source of information, right? The International Monetary Fund has different figures...

http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/...1.x=49&pr1.y=6




> they were talking about housing space, not land area.


Most land area = more housing space. There just isn't as much space in Europe as there is in the US.

----------


## death45456

> script what is nominal figures?


Nominal GDP
A gross domestic product (GDP) figure that has not been adjusted for inflation.

Notes:
It can be misleading when inflation is not accounted for in the GDP figure because the GDP will appear higher than it actually is. The same concept that applies to return on investment (ROI) applies here. If you have a 10% ROI and inflation for the year has been 3%, your real rate of return would be 7%. Similarly, if the nominal GDP figure has shot up 8% but inflation has been 4%, the real GDP has only increased 4%. 

Also known as current dollar or chained dollar GDP.

----------


## scriptfactory

> Nominal GDP
> A gross domestic product (GDP) figure that has not been adjusted for inflation.


Exactly. It's the unadjusted value.




> Notes:
> It can be misleading when inflation is not accounted for in the GDP figure because the GDP will appear higher than it actually is. The same concept that applies to return on investment (ROI) applies here. If you have a 10% ROI and inflation for the year has been 3%, your real rate of return would be 7%. Similarly, if the nominal GDP figure has shot up 8% but inflation has been 4%, the real GDP has only increased 4%. 
> 
> Also known as current dollar or chained dollar GDP.


You got that from investopedia, right? The reason it says that is because it is targeted at INVESTORS who need to figure in their real return on their investments, aside from inflation. The world doesn't work on real GDP numbers, though. A 10% ROI is still 10% even though the actual value is less because of inflation...

----------


## Phreak101

BOLD




> I don't think there is another country that has BIGGER immigration issues, but percentage-wise I know other countries have higher rates of illegal immigration. Still, there are like 8-9 million illegals in the US so...
> 
> *Care to name a few?*
> 
> I should have worded what I wrote differently. Of course it's great, if you have the money for it. I just think higher education should be accessible to everyone.
> 
> *Agreed*
> 
> You see welfare families with big screen TV's and empty fridges on a regular basis? Where do you work?
> ...

----------


## scriptfactory

> No, it does not. In a society with people as uneducated in money such as the U.S., socialism will be abused. Which is the exact reason our welfare system is a joke, health care is broke, and the more we give, the more they take. It is creating a society of babies who need to be taken care of and cannot take the next step to being financially independent. We NEED capitalism and democracy to be able to carry these people along on the backs of the middle class.


Do you realize what you are saying? Capitalism is necessary so that we can babysit these people? How about we FIX the problems instead of putting bandaids on them. Capitalism will never take care of the social problems in the US, I guarantee it.




> We do not have the social unity in this country necessary to be able to have people be working for the greater good.


I'm not sure I understand you. "*To be able to have people be working for the greater good*?" That doesn't even make any sense.  :LOL:   :Wink/Grin:

----------


## Phreak101

> Do you realize what you are saying? Capitalism is necessary so that we can babysit these people? How about we FIX the problems instead of putting bandaids on them. Capitalism will never take care of the social problems in the US, I guarantee it.
> 
> 
> I'm not sure I understand you. "*To be able to have people be working for the greater good*?" That doesn't even make any sense.



You sound like a typical liberal my friend..."FIX THE PROBLEMS! THIS IS WHAT'S WRONG! FIX IT!" How about a SOLUTION to the problem for once?  :Icon Rolleyes:  

You don't understand what the phrase "Have people working for the greater good" means? And you call yourself a socialist???  :LOL:

----------


## scriptfactory

> You sound like a typical liberal my friend..."FIX THE PROBLEMS! THIS IS WHAT'S WRONG! FIX IT!" How about a SOLUTION to the problem for once?  
> 
> You don't understand what the phrase "Have people working for the greater good" means? And you call yourself a socialist???


I've suggested solutions, I'm not just screaming "FIX IT." I say the US should adopt some of the social structures that are in place in Europe. The way things are going right now the social situation in the US will only get worse. Why not steal some ideas from countries that already have working social programs?

I still don't think you know what you are talking about with that "greater good" statement. It doesn't make any sense. What does "social unity" have to do with social reform?

----------


## Phreak101

> I've suggested solutions, I'm not just screaming "FIX IT." I say the US should adopt some of the social structures that are in place in Europe. The way things are going right now the social situation in the US will only get worse. Why not steal some ideas from countries that already have working social programs?
> 
> I still don't think you know what you are talking about with that "greater good" statement. It doesn't make any sense. What does "social unity" have to do with social reform?



Now you're just talking out your ass. Violent crime is LOWER now than it was in the 60's and unemployment levels are below 5%, so I question where you get the idea that the social situation is "getting worse"

Are you serious?? Explain to me how there can be (peaceful) social reform without a universal opinion in favor of it?  :Hmmmm:  

Where is Logan when I need him....

----------


## scriptfactory

> Now you're just talking out your ass. Violent crime is LOWER now than it was in the 60's and unemployment levels are below 5%, so I question where you get the idea that the social situation is "getting worse"


I'm talking out of my ass?! Did you even read my posts? I'm talking about education, fair wage and health system reform, not violent crime. When you get more money from welfare than from a McJob I think there is a problem. The child poverty rate is embarrassing for a major developed country, and it's on the rise. Hell, poverty rates as a whole are on the rise. Homelessness is on the rise. The poor need help...

Here is an example of what I am talking about**: Frankfurt is a city with a population of around 650,000. When I walked through downtown Frankfurt recently guess how many homeless people I saw. *Two*. I'm not even sure if they were homeless, they just looked dirty. Could you imagine something like that happening in the States?




> Are you serious?? Explain to me how there can be (peaceful) social reform without a universal opinion in favor of it?


So you are saying we can't achieve the "greater good" in this country because people don't care about it?

----------


## Prada

The two economic systems are very different. No one has a pure capitalist market economy or socialist economy. Somewhat of both is what most countries have. Obviously there is less governement intervention in the former over the latter. Naturally there are advantages and disadvantages to all. Obviously for educated professional the US is much more attractive then a lazy blue collar who gets a very decent living in a socially tilted economy

----------


## Phreak101

BOLD




> I'm talking out of my ass?! Did you even read my posts? I'm talking about education, fair wage and health system reform, not violent crime. When you get more money from welfare than from a McJob I think there is a problem. The child poverty rate is embarrassing for a major developed country, and it's on the rise. Hell, poverty rates as a whole are on the rise. Homelessness is on the rise. The poor need help...
> 
> *The poor need to be taught how to MANAGE MONEY. I see no problem with private donations to the poor, America, after all, IS the most charitable nation in the world. I refuse to support everyone around me. I'll say it again, minimum wage is the reason people make more with welfare than at jobs. Economically, it is incorrect, as I said, ask ANY economist. There is a reason all economists are Republican financially. Last I saw, education in this country was free, so was health care for the poor, as well as the welfare system. Oh wait, all those "socialistic" programs are going broke and do nothing. Better blame the big, bad, corporations that actually GIVE people jobs.*
> 
> Here is an example of what I am talking about**: Frankfurt is a city with a population of around 650,000. When I walked through downtown Frankfurt recently guess how many homeless people I saw. *Two*. I'm not even sure if they were homeless, they just looked dirty. Could you imagine something like that happening in the States?
> 
> *Wow, not 650,000, holy crap! Chicago has 8 MILLION people in it. You wanna see a town with no homeless people, try Omaha, Nebraska, pop. 700,000. You'll get the same results as Frankfurt.*
> 
> So you are saying we can't achieve the "greater good" in this country because people don't care about it?
> ...


You can't give me small, idealized examples like Frankfrut, Germany and expect me to take you seriously in this discussion. New York City has 14 MILLION people in it. Germany has 82,000,000 people in it. That means that L.A., New York, Chicago, Miami, and Dallas have almost HALF the population of Germany...and those are just 5 major cities. 

Your small scale examples turn a blind eye to the biggest melting pot in history and the reprocussions of growing so quickly that are making themselves apparent. If we dumped every illegal alien coming into this country begging for welfare supprt, medical attention, and JOBS into Germany, your "socialistic economy" would collpase in a New York second...not to mention the current LEGAL citizens who are poor that have been forced into the lifestyle of poverty since the 1800's. Capitalism and democracy are the machines that fuel the system that allow all the socialistic programs that we DO have in this country, and they DON'T WORK! Throwing more money at them will accomplish NOTHING. Reforming them is necessary, I agree with you, but not at the expense of what has made this country the greatest superpower ever in record time.

----------


## Phreak101

Germany's affluent and technologically powerful economy - the fifth largest in the world - has become one of the slowest growing economies in the euro zone. A quick turnaround is not in the offing in the foreseeable future. Growth in 2001-03 fell short of 1%, rising to 1.7% in 2004 before falling back to 0.9% in 2005. The modernization and integration of the eastern German economy continues to be a costly long-term process, with annual transfers from west to east amounting to roughly $70 billion. *Germany's aging population, combined with high unemployment, has pushed social security outlays to a level exceeding contributions from workers. Structural rigidities in the labor market - including strict regulations on laying off workers and the setting of wages on a national basis - have made unemployment a chronic problem.*Corporate restructuring and growing capital markets are setting the foundations that could allow Germany to meet the long-term challenges of European economic integration and globalization, particularly if labor market rigidities are further addressed. In the short run, however, the fall in government revenues and the rise in expenditures have raised the deficit above the EU's 3% debt limit. 

Yeah....go Socialistic Germany.... :Aajack: 

And just so I don't have to hear any of your nonsense about the CIA world factbook being "biased", let's post another description of another great example of capitalism and democracy at work!

Since the early 1960s, South Korea has achieved an incredible record of growth and integration into the high-tech modern world economy. Four decades ago, GDP per capita was comparable with levels in the poorer countries of Africa and Asia. In 2004, South Korea joined the trillion dollar club of world economies. Today its GDP per capita is equal to the lesser economies of the EU. This success through the late 1980s was achieved by a system of close government/business ties, including directed credit, import restrictions, sponsorship of specific industries, and a strong labor effort. The government promoted the import of raw materials and technology at the expense of consumer goods and encouraged savings and investment over consumption. The Asian financial crisis of 1997-99 exposed longstanding weaknesses in South Korea's development model, including high debt/equity ratios, massive foreign borrowing, and an undisciplined financial sector. GDP plunged by 6.9% in 1998, then recovered 9.5% in 1999 and 8.5% in 2000. Growth fell back to 3.3% in 2001 because of the slowing global economy, falling exports, and the perception that much-needed corporate and financial reforms had stalled. Led by consumer spending and exports, growth in 2002 was an impressive 7%, despite anemic global growth. Between 2003 and 2005, growth moderated to about 4%. A downturn in consumer spending was offset by rapid export growth. In 2005, the government proposed labor reform legislation and a corporate pension scheme to help make the labor market more flexible, and new real estate policies to cool property speculation. Moderate inflation, low unemployment, an export surplus, and fairly equal distribution of income characterize this solid economy.

----------


## Kärnfysikern

Phreak I would say germany has done extremely well considering the reunification of east and west germany. Remember that half the country was soviet poor not so long ago....

Like I said earlier aswell sweden has MORE imigrants than the usa percentage wise and we have more fleshed out social programs and higher unemployement. So that seems to indicate that imigrants in sweden is probably a bigger economic burden than imigrants in the united states.

----------


## Kärnfysikern

> The poor need to be taught how to MANAGE MONEY. I see no problem with private donations to the poor, America, after all, IS the most charitable nation in the world. I refuse to support everyone around me. I'll say it again, minimum wage is the reason people make more with welfare than at jobs. Economically, it is incorrect, as I said, ask ANY economist. There is a reason all economists are Republican financially. Last I saw, education in this country was free, so was health care for the poor, as well as the welfare system. Oh wait, all those "socialistic" programs are going broke and do nothing. Better blame the big, bad, corporations that actually GIVE people jobs.


Why is minimum wage detrimental to the economy? I suck at economy  :Smilie: 

I mean Im sure alot of economists are republicans over there, but alot of economists are socialist over here...

----------


## scriptfactory

> You can't give me small, idealized examples like Frankfrut, Germany and expect me to take you seriously in this discussion. New York City has 14 MILLION people in it. Germany has 82,000,000 people in it. That means that L.A., New York, Chicago, Miami, and Dallas have almost HALF the population of Germany...and those are just 5 major cities.


I've actually been to Omaha and it has plenty of bums so... I don't know what you are talking about. I just gave an example of a city close to me. When I visited Munich (I know it's not New York) I can't recall seeing any homeless people, either. There just isn't a big homeless population here.

Don't get me wrong, Germany has it's problems. International companies don't want to start new businesses and are closing existing here due to the high taxation rates, etc. However most of these problems would be remedied fairly "easily" by a good political leader. So what do these Germans do? They elect a woman (and she isn't even intelligent) to lead the country... She wants to increase the tax rate by like 9%...




> If we dumped every illegal alien coming into this country begging for welfare supprt, medical attention, and JOBS into Germany, your "socialistic economy" would collpase in a New York second... not to mention the current LEGAL citizens who are poor that have been forced into the lifestyle of poverty since the 1800's. Capitalism and democracy are the machines that fuel the system that allow all the socialistic programs that we DO have in this country, and they DON'T WORK! Throwing more money at them will accomplish NOTHING. Reforming them is necessary, I agree with you, but not at the expense of what has made this country the greatest superpower ever in record time.


You really don't read what I am writing. Don't you think there is a reason they are not working? They tried to increase spending to these social programs and guess what happened, more people used these social programs. I'm saying CHANGE THE PROGRAMS. The ones we have right now obviously aren't working...




> The poor need to be taught how to MANAGE MONEY. I see no problem with private donations to the poor, America, after all, IS the most charitable nation in the world. I refuse to support everyone around me. I'll say it again, minimum wage is the reason people make more with welfare than at jobs. Economically, it is incorrect, as I said, ask ANY economist. There is a reason all economists are Republican financially. Last I saw, education in this country was free, so was health care for the poor, as well as the welfare system. Oh wait, all those "socialistic" programs are going broke and do nothing. Better blame the big, bad, corporations that actually GIVE people jobs.


You keep talking about teaching the poor how to manage money. Did you just invent that by yourself? Do you know how much it would cost the US taxpayer to implement these programs? Too much with too little ROI. How about increasing minimum wage and aggressively deporting illegal immigrants? The US has around 7 million unemployed people and about 8 million illegal (mostly working) immigrants.

Force companies to pay fair wages, what is wrong with that? How do fair wages hurt the economy? Oh, wait. I see. The best thing for the economy would be to turn all blacks and hispanics into slaves. It worked in the past, right? It turned the US into the richest country in the world! Profit at the expense of the poor.

The usual argument is younger/uneducated workers will have a harder time getting jobs with a higher minimum wage. In 2000 a survey was made where they asked academic economists if they agreed with this statement, "a minimum wage increases unemployment among young and unskilled workers." 46% agreed, 28% were in partial agreement and 27% disagreed. They did the same survey in 1990 and the numbers were; 62% agreed, 19.5% partially agreed, and 17.5% disagreed. In 2010 I think the numbers will have shifted again. So, as you can see, economists have widely different views concerning minimum wage. Don't believe everything you see on Fox News.
http://www.indiana.edu/~econed/pdffi...l03/fuller.pdf

Card and Krueger wrote a book called _Myth and Measurement_ (I think) in which they debunked the claims by economists that minimum wage laws reduce jobs, etc. You should read this article that investigated the factuality of the Card/Krueger research.
http://www.epinet.org/briefingpapers...mw_bp_1996.pdf

----------


## Phreak101

> You keep talking about teaching the poor how to manage money. Did you just invent that by yourself? Do you know how much it would cost the US taxpayer to implement these programs? Too much with too little ROI. How about increasing minimum wage and aggressively deporting illegal immigrants? The US has around 7 million unemployed people and about 8 million illegal (mostly working) immigrants.
> 
> *Last I heard education here in the states was FREE. Curriculum adjustments in secondary education would not be diffficult to implement. If you think that teaching the public how to manage their money would not have a positive ROI over time, that leads me to believe you yourself know jack sh!t about managing money yourself. That also happens to be the idea of some of the best selling authors in the world regarding money management, so I'll take what you said as a compliment. The unemployemnt rate in Germany is higher than the U.S., you keep ignoring this fact. How can you have a higher unemployment rate than us, yet have 1/5 of the population, and expect me to take what you say seriously about OUR system?*
> 
> Force companies to pay fair wages, what is wrong with that? How do fair wages hurt the economy? Oh, wait. I see. The best thing for the economy would be to turn all blacks and hispanics into slaves. It worked in the past, right? It turned the US into the richest country in the world! Profit at the expense of the poor.
> 
> *Force companies to pay higher wages?? Why are we forcing the very entities that supply jobs to pay HIGHER wages? I recommend you take ECON 101. By forcing companies to raise the minimum wage, you are also forcing them to eliminate JOBS. Hence the reason why Germany's unemployment is probably so high. Don't get me wrong, no CEO deserves 30 million dollars for doing their job, but force?? I want government OUT of my business, not entangled in it. As for turning blacks and hispanics into slaves, save your nonsensical BS opinions for your NAACP meetings. I find that statement insulting and ignorant.*
> 
> The usual argument is younger/uneducated workers will have a harder time getting jobs with a higher minimum wage. In 2000 a survey was made where they asked academic economists if they agreed with this statement, "a minimum wage increases unemployment among young and unskilled workers." 46% agreed, 28% were in partial agreement and 27% disagreed. They did the same survey in 1990 and the numbers were; 62% agreed, 19.5% partially agreed, and 17.5% disagreed. In 2010 I think the numbers will have shifted again. So, as you can see, economists have widely different views concerning minimum wage. Don't believe everything you see on Fox News.
> ...



I'm done arguing with you. Your country's exmployment rate is utter shit, and your SS program is just as broke as ours. You have no stance to point fingers, especially since you are an ex-patriate. When you can show numbers that prove your system works instead basing everything you say on opinionated communist theory, then we can argue some more. until then, I'm not going to convince you, and vice-versa, so let's agree to disagree.

----------


## Phreak101

> Why is minimum wage detrimental to the economy? I suck at economy 
> 
> I mean Im sure alot of economists are republicans over there, but alot of economists are socialist over here...


Simple. Let's say you raise the minimum wage 2 dollars an hour. Now imagine a company has 2,000,000 hourly employees. That's 4,000,000 dollars an HOUR in wage increases the company has to pay out. If you imagine a 40 hour week, 50 weeks a year..

$80,000,000 * 50wks a year = 4 BILLION dollars a year a company has to spend to pay its workers more. That cost will be passed on to the consumer in the form of hiogher prices, which then makes people say "I can't afford my groceries! I need a higher minimum wage! I can't afford to live!" I'd MUCH rather see that 4 billion dollars used to hire MORE workers, be put in to R&D, be put in to mfg., etc.

Raising the minimum wage is a downward economic spiral, and all it does is allow more regulation by the government, and stifle the free market.

Phreak says.."Fvck that!" to government regulation!  :1hifu:

----------


## scriptfactory

> Simple. Let's say you raise the minimum wage 2 dollars an hour. Now imagine a company has 2,000,000 employees. That's 4,000,000 dollars an HOUR in wage increases the company has to pay out. If you imagine a 40 hour week, 50 weeks a year..
> 
> $80,000,000 * 50wks a year = 4 BILLION dollars a year a company has to spend to pay its workers more. That cost will be passed on to the consumer in the form of hiogher prices, which then makes people say "I can't afford my groceries! I need a higher minimum wage! I can't afford to live!" I'd MUCH rather see that 4 billion dollars sued to higher MORE workers, be put in to R&D, be put in to mfg., etc.
> 
> Raising the minimum wage is a downward economic spiral, and all it does is allow more regulation by the government, and stifle the free market.
> 
> Phreak says.."Fvck that!" to government regulation!


You are hilarious!!! Do you know a company that has 2 million employees working at minimum wage?  :LOL: 

BTW, they wouldn't have to raise the wages of all of their employees, only the ones working for under minimum wage... yeah...

----------


## scriptfactory

> I'm done arguing with you. Your country's exmployment rate is utter shit, and your SS program is just as broke as ours. You have no stance to point fingers, especially since *you are an ex-patriate*. When you can show numbers that prove your system works instead basing everything you say on opinionated communist theory, then we can argue some more. until then, I'm not going to convince you, and vice-versa, so let's agree to disagree.


Nice. Germany is not my country, I am not a citizen here. I only have a visa... I hate to live here because Germans are rude as hell. In fact, I've only been living and working in the German economy since 2003. I visit the US frequently (since it IS my country). You can't deal with my arguments so you call me an ex-patriate and a communist.

Good job! You shouldn't feel embarassed at all...

----------


## Phreak101

> You are hilarious!!! Do you know a company that has 2 million employees working at minimum wage? 
> 
> BTW, they wouldn't have to raise the wages of all of their employees, only the ones working for under minimum wage... yeah...


Walmart has about 900,000. Yum Foods has about 1 million. They are both grocery companies that will universally pass higher prices to the consumer. Now what?  :Liar:

----------


## Phreak101

> Nice. Germany is not my country, I am not a citizen here. I only have a visa... I hate to live here because Germans are rude as hell. In fact, I've only been living and working in the German economy since 2003. I visit the US frequently (since it IS my country). You can't deal with my arguments so you call me an ex-patriate and a communist.
> 
> Good job! You shouldn't feel embarassed at all...


I don't! I support free marktet!  :1laugh:  Your arguments are shit, so I choose not to deal with them, plain and simple. 

You're done, so am I.

----------


## RA

Im no economist but I dont see another country footing as large a bill at the U.N. or The "International Space Station" or any relief effort that takes place anywhere. Just to name a few...

----------


## Phreak101

[QUOTE=scriptfactory]Nice. Germany is not my country, I am not a citizen here. I only have a visa... I hate to live here because Germans are rude as hell. QUOTE]

I'll be sure to scartch Germany off my place to visit, I dodn't know they were all rude.

----------


## scriptfactory

> Walmart has about 900,000. Yum Foods has about 1 million. They are both grocery companies that will universally pass higher prices to the consumer. Now what?


I know for a fact Wal*Mart does not have 900,000 employees working at minimum wage. In fact, I worked for WM when I was 16yo and make much more than minimum wage (about $3 more.) The average worker at WM makes $9.50 and they have around 1.5 million employees, I believe.

Not sure about Yum Foods but if you have a link supporting your claims I would like to see it.

 :Liar:

----------


## Phreak101

> I know for a fact Wal*Mart does not have 900,000 employees working at minimum wage. In fact, I worked for WM when I was 16yo and make much more than minimum wage (about $3 more.) The average worker at WM makes $9.50 and they have around 1.5 million employees, I believe.
> 
> Not sure about Yum Foods but if you have a link supporting your claims I would like to see it.


Find them yourself if you're that interested, this is stupid.

----------


## scriptfactory

> Find them yourself if you're that interested, this is stupid.


That's awesome. You call me a liar and then make up some BS facts supporting your views.  :What?:  

Great debate. Too bad Logan wasn't here to help you. Then you might not have needed to resort to lies.

----------


## Phreak101

> That's awesome. You call me a liar and then make up some BS facts supporting your views.  
> 
> Great debate. Too bad Logan wasn't here to help you. Then you might not have needed to resort to lies.


Look them up, they are not lies. I have my inet access blocked at work, and AR is one of three sites I can get on, which is why I'm on here all day. Im stopping this because this is exactly why the political forum was shut down, know-it-alls like you will argue till they are blue in the face to prove to whomever is listening that they are right. Get a hobby.

I don't want to be a part of this section being shut down as well, and I recommend you try the same.

----------


## scriptfactory

> Look them up, they are not lies. I have my inet access blocked at work, and AR is one of three sites I can get on, which is why I'm on here all day. Im stopping this because this is exactly why the political forum was shut down, know-it-alls like you will argue till they are blue in the face to prove to whomever is listening that they are right. Get a hobby.
> 
> I don't want to be a part of this section being shut down as well, and I recommend you try the same.


Just admit you were  :Owned:   :LOL:  

BTW, the political forum was shut down because of other reasons, not "know-it-alls".

----------


## Kärnfysikern

> Im no economist but I dont see another country footing as large a bill at the U.N. or The "International Space Station" or any relief effort that takes place anywhere. Just to name a few...


Depends if we talk % of countries GDP or just plain sum  :Big Grin:

----------


## Phreak101

> Just admit you were   
> 
> BTW, the political forum was shut down because of other reasons, not "know-it-alls".


You'd like that wouldn't you? Online arguing sounds like a hobby of yours... :Icon Rolleyes:  

You gave your stats, I gave mine, no one can be right in an argument of opinion, but keep patting yourself on the back if it makes you feel better.

Last post from me in this thread.

----------


## scriptfactory

> You'd like that wouldn't you? Online arguing sounds like a hobby of yours... 
> 
> *You gave your stats, I gave mine*, no one can be right in an argument of opinion, but keep patting yourself on the back if it makes you feel better.
> 
> Last post from me in this thread.


The only difference is I backed all of my stats up, guy. I really hope you refrain from posting in this thread because you got  :Owned:   :LOL:

----------


## Phreak101

> The only difference is I backed all of my stats up, guy. I really hope you refrain from posting in this thread because you got


I'll post one more. You're a loser...nuff said. See my factbook post, says it all. Johan is right, Germany has done well since the eastern bloc came back over to the light side, but results speak for themselves. All one needs to do is compare the GDP and unemployment levels of the US and Germany, and they can see that all your "facts" about socialism that you have used to back up your argument simply do not hold water, and are just theory. They are plenty of arguments FOR socialism, but to argue that socialistic programs > capitalistic programs, ESPECIALLY in the US, just doesn't work, the numbers show it. The US is the most powerful economy in the world, bar none. You can't deny that, and it's obvious.

State all the theories you want, but the facts are there, and when FACTS are there, that, my friend, is being  :Owned:  

Now get back to your  :Aajack:  to the hammer and sickle, I  :0piss:  on your socialism.

----------


## Kärnfysikern

Dont start any name calling there is no need for it. Just chill and relax!

Phreak, script. you are both good bros so dont turn it personal.

----------


## Kärnfysikern

My argument for socialism is far from a economic one, Its about how we want to treat people and what peoples role in society is, what people can expect from society and what responsibilities people have towards society.

Many social programs are run in poor ways in sweden, that doesnt mean the social programs are fundamentaly flawed. They just need to be updated and applied differently.

If it means I have to pay a bit more for products, pay a bit more in tax and earn a bit less cash Im willing to make that tradeoff in order to assure no one in my country has to live in utter poverty or starve. Some lazy bums will take advantage of that, its inevitable. But most of the people that have to turn to social programs are mostly those that happen to run into a string of bad luck and was fortunate enough to have those safety nets to catch them.

I have been forced to live on social security twice in my life. First time was for half a year when I could not stand living with my alcoholic bum for a dad anymore, not after he had threatened to kill me, so I just needed the means to survive on my own until I finished high school and could move and start university. The second time was just for a month when I could not find any job, had no money at all and could not get unemployment cash. That month I had to turn to social security because otherwise I wouldnt have had either food on the table or money to pay my rent.

Those kind of situations is what the social programs are all about. As a safety net to ordinary people that fall on hard times from time to time. Its not suposed to be a permanent way of living and it should be designed in a way such that no one could live on it for a extended period of time either.

But I think most people are exactly like myself, that they consider it a disgrace to have to "beg" for money in that way. So for the most part I am confident the money goes to people that need it. 

I consider minimum wage as a part of that, to ensure no one has to work for more than 40 hours a week to survive, its unhumane and has no place in modern societies. Life is a whole lot more than just work. Money should not be the sole purpose of life and society should be inclined in a way that places the emphasis of quality of life not quantity of cash.

I dont agree with alot of state regulations on buisness or state meddling in the buissnes of the avarage joe, in alot of ways I am libertarian. Or well I am a social liberal. But the state need to ensure that companies can not treat employees like shit.

----------


## Phreak101

> Dont start any name calling there is no need for it. Just chill and relax!
> 
> Phreak, script. you are both good bros so dont turn it personal.


True, no need for ir. My apologies script, but I still stand by my point. No need for gloating from either side.

----------


## scriptfactory

> *My argument for socialism is far from a economic one, Its about how we want to treat people and what peoples role in society is, what people can expect from society and what responsibilities people have towards society.*
> 
> Many social programs are run in poor ways in sweden, that doesnt mean the social programs are fundamentaly flawed. They just need to be updated and applied differently.
> 
> If it means I have to pay a bit more for products, pay a bit more in tax and earn a bit less cash Im willing to make that tradeoff in order to assure no one in my country has to live in utter poverty or starve. Some lazy bums will take advantage of that, its inevitable. But most of the people that have to turn to social programs are mostly those that happen to run into a string of bad luck and was fortunate enough to have those safety nets to catch them.
> 
> I have been forced to live on social security twice in my life. First time was for half a year when I could not stand living with my alcoholic bum for a dad anymore, not after he had threatened to kill me, so I just needed the means to survive on my own until I finished high school and could move and start university. The second time was just for a month when I could not find any job, had no money at all and could not get unemployment cash. That month I had to turn to social security because otherwise I wouldnt have had either food on the table or money to pay my rent.
> 
> Those kind of situations is what the social programs are all about. As a safety net to ordinary people that fall on hard times from time to time. Its not suposed to be a permanent way of living and it should be designed in a way such that no one could live on it for a extended period of time either.
> ...


Excellent post. Thanks.

----------


## Prada

An argument is futile. There is no right or wrong economic system. There is only a more beneficial system for an individual based on their interpretation, needs, including quality of life. Its quite complex to determine what the `best` system is. To subjective.

----------


## Phreak101

> An argument is futile. There is no right or wrong economic system. There is only a more beneficial system for an individual based on their interpretation, needs, including quality of life. Its quite complex to determine what the `best` system is. To subjective.


YES!  :7up:

----------


## scriptfactory

> An argument is futile. There is no right or wrong economic system. There is only a more beneficial system for an individual based on their interpretation, needs, including quality of life. Its quite complex to determine what the `best` system is. *To subjective*.


Definitely right. It is highly subjective.

Socialism is pro humanity.
Capitalism is pro currency.

It's a difficult decision for a lot of people to make.  :LOL:

----------


## RA

> Depends if we talk % of countries GDP or just *plain sum*


 

 :Wink/Grin:

----------


## Logan13

> You are hilarious!!! Do you know a company that has 2 million employees working at minimum wage? 
> 
> BTW, they wouldn't have to raise the wages of all of their employees, only the ones working for under minimum wage... yeah...


So if new employees are making minimum wage ($5.15/hr) and then get a $2/hr wage hike to $7.15/hr, do you not think that those who have been there for awhile making $7.50/hr are not going to be pissed and insist on a wage hike as well? Than if they get a raise to say $9/hr, those who are making $9.50 are gonna get pissed, etc, etc, etc..............

----------


## scriptfactory

> So if new employees are making minimum wage ($5.15/hr) and then get a $2/hr wage hike to $7.15/hr, do you not think that those who have been there for awhile making $7.50/hr are not going to be pissed and insist on a wage hike as well? Than if they get a raise to say $9/hr, those who are making $9.50 are gonna get pissed, etc, etc, etc..............


That doesn't matter. If they don't like it then they can hit the road. Who cares if they are pissed. Furthermore, a company doesn't have to tell an employee how much their co-workers are making... Minimum wage laws were implemented successfully in the UK with absolutely no effect on employment rates so people weren't getting pissed enough to quit their jobs, obviously.

----------


## RA

> Definitely right. It is highly subjective.
> 
> Socialism is pro humanity.
> Capitalism is pro currency.
> 
> It's a difficult decision for a lot of people to make.


 

Not me. Capitalism all the way... :7up:

----------


## breacherup

one year at the top of one list does not mean much.

----------


## Kärnfysikern

> one year at the top of one list does not mean much.


ohh its far more than a year, the nordic countries has been on the top for a long time

----------


## J.S.N.

> Simple. Let's say you raise the minimum wage 2 dollars an hour. Now imagine a company has 2,000,000 hourly employees. That's 4,000,000 dollars an HOUR in wage increases the company has to pay out. If you imagine a 40 hour week, 50 weeks a year..
> 
> $80,000,000 * 50wks a year = 4 BILLION dollars a year a company has to spend to pay its workers more. That cost will be passed on to the consumer in the form of hiogher prices, which then makes people say "I can't afford my groceries! I need a higher minimum wage! I can't afford to live!" I'd MUCH rather see that 4 billion dollars used to hire MORE workers, be put in to R&D, be put in to mfg., etc.
> 
> Raising the minimum wage is a downward economic spiral, and all it does is allow more regulation by the government, and stifle the free market.
> 
> Phreak says.."Fvck that!" to government regulation!


the free market is not so free. if i could only find a job making $2.50 a hour because there's no minimum wage, i think i would start robbing people very quickly. but how is it one person can be free to exclude others while the other isn't free to take what they have? it's hypocrisy pure and simple.

----------


## Phreak101

> the free market is not so free. if i could only find a job making $2.50 a hour because there's no minimum wage, i think i would start robbing people very quickly. but how is it one person can be free to exclude others while the other isn't free to take what they have? it's hypocrisy pure and simple.


You're assuming that's what you would be paid regardless. The competition amongst employers for workers would overshadow ripping all of them off. If Lowe's pays it's emloyees 6 dollars an hour and Home Depot pays 10, Lowe's will lose all it's (valuable) employees to Home Depot.

It's the Nash Equilibrium. The mathematics and numbers behind it find that companies that work together for the greater good of the industry in both expenses and profits do better. Besides, if everyone was making $2.50 an hour, no one could afford to live, therefore the companies would not be making any profits due to lack of sales. It is in a company's best interest to make sure their employees make enough money to turn around and spend it again.

----------


## J.S.N.

> You're assuming that's what you would be paid regardless. The competition amongst employers for workers would overshadow ripping all of them off. If Lowe's pays it's emloyees 6 dollars an hour and Home Depot pays 10, Lowe's will lose all it's (valuable) employees to Home Depot.
> 
> It's the Nash Equilibrium. The mathematics and numbers behind it find that companies that work together for the greater good of the industry in both expenses and profits do better. Besides, if everyone was making $2.50 an hour, no one could afford to live, therefore the companies would not be making any profits due to lack of sales. It is in a company's best interest to make sure their employees make enough money to turn around and spend it again.


and how, pray tell, does that apply to the real world? you can work "full time" (39.5hrs.) at a place like wal-mart and home depot right now for minimum wage and not make enough money to support yourself, much less a spouse and 2.5 kids, much less china where it's so much worse.

----------


## Logan13

> That doesn't matter. If they don't like it then they can hit the road. Who cares if they are pissed. Furthermore, a company doesn't have to tell an employee how much their co-workers are making... Minimum wage laws were implemented successfully in the UK with absolutely no effect on employment rates so people weren't getting pissed enough to quit their jobs, obviously.


it would be naive to think that co-workers do not discuss pay rates amongst each other. These are things which management needs to keep in mind since an employee who thinks he is not being paid fairly will become less productive. Regardless, how many American adults are actually making minimum wage, I mean really? Kids detassling corn at the end of summer make more than that per hour. If there are truely men with families out there who are only making $5.15/hour than I would be inclined to believe that it is because they do not wish to work harder than the $5.15/hour position that they currently hold. Kids working at Dairy Queen make that kind of money, so the question than becomes, who will benefit from the minimum wage hike and who will be hurt by it. In the end, the consumer will be hurt by it........and we are all consumers guys!

----------


## Kärnfysikern

Its also naive to think that the major companies would not work togheter to keep salaries down if they had the chanse. How long did it take for child labor to be abandoned? How hard to the kids in the shoe factories in asia work for the pennies a month?

The major companies would **** every employee they had twice if they could make a legal profit out of it. So would I if I where in charge of a company since my duty would be to the stock holders not those employed by me.

----------


## Logan13

> Its also naive to think that the major companies would not work togheter to keep salaries down if they had the chanse. How long did it take for child labor to be abandoned? How hard to the kids in the shoe factories in asia work for the pennies a month?
> 
> The major companies would **** every employee they had twice if they could make a legal profit out of it. So would I if I where in charge of a company since my duty would be to the stock holders not those employed by me.


What the hell does this have to do with the minimum wage scale here in America? Your international labor questions need to be addressed to those 3rd world countries that allow this to occur. Like it or not, less than 1% of US workers who have dependents make minimum wage. Again, the question becomes who would gain by an American minimum wage hike? The democratic politicians who bring it up as a topic in their platform would be the correct answer. 
It is the same problem that the Unions have brought upon the US. They raise labor rates so high that large companies are forced to move overseas. I work in the construction industry(supply side). Who would you hire to finish your concrete Johan, a union finisher who gets paid $33.50/hour ($69,680/year) or a non-union finisher who gets paid $14/hour($29,120/year)? Does the union really think that concrete finishing is a job that is truely worth $70K/year? The Bureau of Labor Statistics reports the average annual wages in the U.S. as $36,764 for 2002. Real median earnings of men age 15 and older who worked full-time, year-round in 2003 ($40,668) -source: U.S. Census Bureau

-Logan13

----------


## J.S.N.

if a concrete finsihing job isn't worth that i'd hate to see what a middle manager is worth.

----------


## Chad B

Socialism turns into communism which turns into Nazi GermanyThen by our blood we Capitalists will come save you.

Communism good theory, would work if we were in heaven and there was no sin.

You can not starve in USA all you need to do is go to a church and they give you food. 

Just because you work harder and make more money doesnt mean you should be penalized with more taxes. If you want to give more you should be able to do it by your own free will, not be forced by the government. FREEDOM. This is why we Americans have all the private organizations helping and giving more food and such to the world than any other country. All of our main governments could care less

If your government and mine really really cared there would not be hundreds of children raped and dieing from starvation and genocide in Africa daily. If all our countries gave troops to go in there, 2 million troops would stop the genocide in a day, but there is no oil there.

----------


## Logan13

> Dont start any name calling there is no need for it. Just chill and relax!
> 
> Phreak, script. you are both good bros so dont turn it personal.


True, both good guys and add much too many threads. Anabolic first, ethnic and political second. Most of those who put ethnic and political first are thankfully gone now!

----------


## Logan13

> Socialism turns into communism which turns into Nazi GermanyThen by our blood we Capitalists will come save you.
> 
> Communism good theory, would work if we were in heaven and there was no sin.
> 
> You can not starve in USA all you need to do is go to a church and they give you food. 
> 
> Just because you work harder and make more money doesnt mean you should be penalized with more taxes. If you want to give more you should be able to do it by your own free will, not be forced by the government. FREEDOM. This is why we Americans have all the private organizations helping and giving more food and such to the world than any other country. All of our main governments could care less
> 
> *If your government and mine really really cared there would not be hundreds of children raped and dieing from starvation and genocide in Africa daily. If all our countries gave troops to go in there, 2 million troops would stop the genocide in a day, but there is no oil there*.


true.......

----------


## scriptfactory

> What the hell does this have to do with the minimum wage scale here in America? Your international labor questions need to be addressed to those 3rd world countries that allow this to occur. Like it or not, less than 1% of US workers who have dependents make minimum wage. Again, the question becomes who would gain by an American minimum wage hike? The democratic politicians who bring it up as a topic in their platform would be the correct answer. 
> It is the same problem that the Unions have brought upon the US. They raise labor rates so high that large companies are forced to move overseas. I work in the construction industry(supply side). Who would you hire to finish your concrete Johan, a union finisher who gets paid $33.50/hour ($69,680/year) or a non-union finisher who gets paid $14/hour($29,120/year)? Does the union really think that concrete finishing is a job that is truely worth $70K/year? The Bureau of Labor Statistics reports the average annual wages in the U.S. as $36,764 for 2002. Real median earnings of men age 15 and older who worked full-time, year-round in 2003 ($40,668) -source: U.S. Census Bureau
> 
> -Logan13


You do realize that there are 8 million Americans (citizens, not illegals) working for under $7.25/hour right? That less than $15,000 annually when working full time. You do realize that isn't enough money for anyone to live on, right? Half of these people making so little are older than 24 years old and half are also the primary income earners for their families.

That is messed up...

----------


## scriptfactory

> Dont start any name calling there is no need for it. Just chill and relax!
> 
> Phreak, script. you are both good bros so dont turn it personal.


Sorry, man! I missed this post. I wasn't name calling maliciously. I was just joking with him because I thought he was joking with me...  :Frown:  Maybe not.

----------


## Kärnfysikern

> What the hell does this have to do with the minimum wage scale here in America? Your international labor questions need to be addressed to those 3rd world countries that allow this to occur. Like it or not, less than 1% of US workers who have dependents make minimum wage. Again, the question becomes who would gain by an American minimum wage hike? The democratic politicians who bring it up as a topic in their platform would be the correct answer.


What I am saying is simply that I dont belive in a totaly free economy. Im the first to admit I dont know shit about economi, but it seems obvious there must always be balances to make sure cooperations doesnt run over anything and everything because the CEO's only care about profit.
There interest for profit has to be balanced by laws that force them to take responsibility for the communities they are involved with. 
The exodus for production companies into the asian countries with low wages and no environmental laws is cold hard proof that they will do anything to make a extra buck. That shit has to be stopped.





> It is the same problem that the Unions have brought upon the US. They raise labor rates so high that large companies are forced to move overseas. I work in the construction industry(supply side). Who would you hire to finish your concrete Johan, a union finisher who gets paid $33.50/hour ($69,680/year) or a non-union finisher who gets paid $14/hour($29,120/year)? Does the union really think that concrete finishing is a job that is truely worth $70K/year? The Bureau of Labor Statistics reports the average annual wages in the U.S. as $36,764 for 2002. Real median earnings of men age 15 and older who worked full-time, year-round in 2003 ($40,668) -source: U.S. Census Bureau
> -Logan13


Well 70k sounds awfully high. Im obviously talking about reasonable minimum wages. I cant say I care much for unions either way. 
A reasonable minimum is for instance 20k/year as the lowest for someone working 40hours week and 5 weeks paid vaccation. Anyone can live on that, but its not a life in luxury. IMO any full time job is worth that, doesnt matter if its flipping burgers or whatever. 

Im not saying the minimum wage should be something absurd like 30-40k. Im just saying that the minimum should be enough so that no one is forced to work several jobs or more than 40 hours week just to survive. Modern society should be about ensuring quality of life for everyone. Like I said earlier I dont mind one bit to pay a few extra cent for a product if I know it ensures higher wages for those working there and Im saying that even though I am a shit poor student. Im willing to lower my standard of living a bit to raise everyone elses.

----------


## Kärnfysikern

> Sorry, man! I missed this post. I wasn't name calling maliciously. I was just joking with him because I thought he was joking with me...  Maybe not.


No problem, it just started to sound very hostile and you know how it is on the net. Jokes easily turn into insults if read the wrong way  :Smilie:

----------


## Kärnfysikern

> True, both good guys and add much too many threads. Anabolic first, ethnic and political second. Most of those who put ethnic and political first are thankfully gone now!


Was that a discrete hint to me to get lost  :Wink:  :Wink/Grin:  




> Socialism turns into communism which turns into Nazi GermanyThen by our blood we Capitalists will come save you.
> 
> Communism good theory, would work if we were in heaven and there was no sin.


The nordic countries has been social democratic for like 70 years without ever drifting towards communism..Modern day socialism isnt realy the same as marx distorted dreams thank god. :7up:  

Funnily enough capitalism aswell would work perfectly if everyone was good and honest people. Thats why we need both.




> Just because you work harder and make more money doesnt mean you should be penalized with more taxes.


Im all with you here, the same tax % should applie to everyone regardless of wealth. Beeing wealthy is a good thing, not a sin as many socialist proponents seem to think(I am one of those semi socialists that have no jealousy towards rich people, only admiration).




> If your government and mine really really cared there would not be hundreds of children raped and dieing from starvation and genocide in Africa daily. If all our countries gave troops to go in there, 2 million troops would stop the genocide in a day, but there is no oil there.


Yeah the world is a truly shitty place if born in the wrong place. Europe and america has never taken the responsibility we need to take towards the rest of the world. To bad the UN never worked out the way it was intended even though it does alot of good.

----------


## Kärnfysikern

> You do realize that there are 8 million Americans (citizens, not illegals) working for under $7.25/hour right? That less than $15,000 annually when working full time. You do realize that isn't enough money for anyone to live on, right? Half of these people making so little are older than 24 years old and half are also the primary income earners for their families.
> 
> That is messed up...


Well you know, why care about the bottom 0.5% or so. They are probably stupid, lazy or both so **** em :AaGreen22:

----------


## scriptfactory

> Well you know, why care about the bottom 0.5% or so. They are probably stupid, lazy or both so **** em


Right! F--k their children, too! They don't need to eat.  :LOL:

----------


## Kärnfysikern

> Right! F--k their children, too! They don't need to eat.


hell yeah, they are like cockroaches, give them food and instead of one lazy bum you get 10 lazy bum sucking the goverment dry. Id say castrate them bastard right away!!

----------


## scriptfactory

> Im all with you here, the same tax % should applie to everyone regardless of wealth. Beeing wealthy is a good thing, not a sin as many socialist proponents seem to think(I am one of those semi socialists that have no jealousy towards rich people, only admiration).


I'm with you also. I think there should be a flat tax rate. The only problem is in the US there are special tax laws. Like the ones for investors. Money made from capital gains (i.e. investments) get special tax breaks. This is great for rich people because the majority of their income doesn't come from wages, it comes from things investments.

Hell, there is like $300 billion dollars a year in tax fraud, most of it coming from corporations and rich individuals and they are almost never prosecuted. I think much more should be done to prosecute these people. The average working class poor person is three times more likely to be audited than a wealthy person ($100k+ annual salary) even though the wealthy person is like 100x more like to commit tax fraud. The funny thing is, there are less and less audits taking place among the rich. Why is that?

----------


## scriptfactory

> hell yeah, they are like cockroaches, give them food and instead of one lazy bum you get 10 lazy bum sucking the goverment dry. Id say castrate them bastard right away!!


The sad part is, a lot of people actually think this way...  :Frown:

----------


## RA

> The sad part is, a lot of people actually think this way...


 

Now I have to call  :Bs:  on this part. The poor in the U.S. would look like rich people in Cuba. 

You go into their house and they have a new tv, microwave, cell phone..etc etc etc...and they are probably overweight! 

Most of the people working for 15k are just starting out. If you are 40 and still working for that your either stupid, lazy, or both.

----------


## RA

> Im no economist but I dont see another country footing as large a bill at the U.N. or The "International Space Station" or any relief effort that takes place anywhere. Just to name a few...


 
I reiterate my point. If the "Nordic" countries economies are so much better then why would a much much younger country like the U.S. have to carry a bigger burden?

----------


## Kärnfysikern

> I reiterate my point. If the "Nordic" countries economies are so much better then why would a much much younger country like the U.S. have to carry a bigger burden?


never said they are better, just that they are competitive.

The US carries a smaller burden in relation to population when it comes to the UN and foreign aid. 
I cant say how much sweden is fotting to the ISS but its probably not much.

----------


## RA

> never said they are better, *just that they are competitive*.
> 
> .


 

That will work :Wink/Grin:

----------


## scriptfactory

> Now I have to call  on this part. *The poor in the U.S. would look like rich people in Cuba.* 
> 
> You go into their house and they have a new tv, microwave, cell phone..etc etc etc...and they are probably overweight! 
> 
> Most of the people working for 15k are just starting out. If you are 40 and still working for that your either stupid, lazy, or both.


Why do people always say things like this? I'm not a citizen of Cuba so I really don't give a damn what they do with their country. Minimum wage is lower than it has been in the last 50 years. The statistics show that people are making more money than ever, but the poor are poorer than they have been in a very long time... Various polls have shown that something like 9 out of 10 people are in favor of raising minimum wage, the only problem is certain people don't want that to happen. Guess who those people are? I'll give you a hint. They aren't in the lower or middle income brackets.

----------


## Chad B

> Why do people always say things like this? I'm not a citizen of Cuba so I really don't give a damn what they do with their country. Minimum wage is lower than it has been in the last 50 years. The statistics show that people are making more money than ever, but the poor are poorer than they have been in a very long time... Various polls have shown that something like 9 out of 10 people are in favor of raising minimum wage, the only problem is certain people don't want that to happen. Guess who those people are? I'll give you a hint. They aren't in the lower or middle income brackets.


 If you have ever journeyed through a third world country, you come back to the USA and you would say that theses what you call poor, minimum wage people, are truly blessed of God to be in America were they are full. *Not with materialistic things but necessary things.* Unless you are that vein. This is why there are hundreds of thousands literally dieing to come to America, the land of the Free. 

Rich and poor people are committing suicide. Riches are within you, inner peace. You could be a rich poor (unhappy) person or a poor happy person with riches within.

I just cant believe these ungrateful, inconsiderate people could complain about these well feed (most obese in America), housed people when *hundreds of 10,11,12 year old girls are being raped daily, thousands of children being starved to death daily, all by soldiers in Africa.* They have no fire power, all our governments could give troops to go in there, and 2 million troops would put a stop to this horrific act in 1 day with no casualties. But all our governments just talk about putting a stop to it. All Hippocrates. Then I hear these guys, complaining about $7 an hour and wanting to give more power to the government, makes me sick.

What is the difference in Hitter Germany and our governments just watching this go on, I heard it has over doubled the death as the holocaust. How can all our countries allow this to be going on in the world, how can they live with themselves. All Hippocrates.

----------


## scriptfactory

> If you have ever journeyed through a third world country, you come back to the USA and you would say that theses what you call poor, minimum wage people, are truly blessed of God to be in America were they are full. Not with materialistic things but necessary things. Unless you are that vein. This is why there are hundreds of thousands literally dieing to come to America, the land of the Free. 
> 
> Rich and poor people are committing suicide. Riches are within you, inner peace. You could be a rich poor (unhappy) person or a poor happy person with riches within.
> 
> I just cant believe these ungrateful, inconsiderate people could complain about these well feed (most obese in America), housed people when hundreds of 10,11,12 year old girls are being raped daily, thousands of children being starved to death daily, all by soldiers in Africa. They have no fire power, all our governments could give troops to go in there, and 2 million troops would put a stop to this horrific act in 1 day with no casualties. But all our governments just talk about putting a stop to it. All Hippocrates. Then I hear these guys, complaining about $7 an hour and wanting to give more power to the government, makes me sick.
> 
> What is the difference in Hitter Germany and our governments just watching this go on, I heard it has over doubled the death as the holocaust. How can all our countries allow this to be going on in the world, how can they live with themselves. All Hippocrates.


What are you talking about, dude? I'm talking about helping the US solve its internal problems. In fact, if we focused more on our social issues and less on foreign ones there would be a drastic change in the social outlook of the US.

That being said, I totally agree with you about the hypocritical nature of Americans. US citizens DO have it good compared to a lot of people around the world. I sympathize with the situation in Africa more than a lot of people do. I was about to volunteer there but my wife got pregnant and threatened to leave me if I left her to have that baby on her own!  :Big Grin:  The US does a lot of good in the world but it seems like money is being spent on inappropriate things. The US has spent over $300 billion dollars to "fight terror" in Iraq. The funny thing is, like I said earlier, more than that is stolen every year due to tax fraud. While we are wasting so much money we might as well fix our internal problems first, right? I mean, the health care situation is getting ridiculous. That's all I'm saying.

----------


## Chad B

*Bold...*





> Why do people always say things like this? *Because it is the hard truth, can you handle it?*
> 
> I'm not a citizen of Cuba so I really don't give a damn what they do with their country. *so I guess your ok with thousands of children raped and starved to death by goverment solders in africa?*
> 
> Minimum wage is lower than it has been in the last 50 years. The statistics show that people are making more money than ever, but the poor are poorer than they have been in a very long time... Various polls have shown that something like 9 out of 10 people are in favor of raising minimum wage, the only problem is certain people don't want that to happen. Guess who those people are? I'll give you a hint. They aren't in the lower or middle income brackets. *Wrong they are the upper middle class.*

----------


## scriptfactory

> Because it is the hard truth, can you handle it?


Umm... the same people who talk about these facts don't give a damn about the people in those countries. They just use it as an excuse to say US citizens aren't so poor...




> so I guess your ok with thousands of children raped and starved to death by goverment solders in africa?


Not at all. Why would I be OK with it? I'm all for the greater good. If the US was devoting the majority of it's resources to dealing with actual problems instead of fictional ones I would have absolutely no problem with it. Too bad it isn't happening.




> Wrong they are the upper middle class


I wasn't including the upper middle class and higher in my statement. Only the poor and "normal" middle class.

----------


## Chad B

*bold...*




> What are you talking about, dude? I'm talking about helping the US solve its internal problems. In fact, if we focused more on our social issues and less on foreign ones there would be a drastic change in the social outlook of the US. *We are all humans and there should be no foreigners. Selfishness is why the world is the way it is*
> 
> That being said, I totally agree with you about the hypocritical nature of Americans. *I said all our "rich" Countries!*
> 
> US citizens DO have it good compared to a lot of people around the world. I sympathize with the situation in Africa more than a lot of people do. I was about to volunteer there but my wife got pregnant and threatened to leave me if I left her to have that baby on her own!  The US does a lot of good in the world but it seems like money is being spent on inappropriate things. The US has spent over $300 billion dollars to "fight terror" in Iraq. The funny thing is, like I said earlier, more than that is stolen every year due to tax fraud. While we are wasting so much money we might as well fix our internal problems first, right? *You mean strain the Nat and swallow the camel* 
> 
> I mean, the health care situation is getting ridiculous. That's all I'm saying. *I don't know how you grew up but I was on the streets, homeless for 10 years, during that time I got very sick several times, even were I needed surgery. I had NO money but still got free medical care from the USA. So you can read all you want, I LIVED IT PERSONAL TESTAMONEYTHE TRUTH IS HITTING YOU, WILL YOU BELIEVE IT OR WILL YOU CHOOSE TO CLOSE YOUR EARS AND BELIEVE A LIE. After saying this I feel free to say that we have no medical problem in America compared to the medical problems of Africa, So we should help them first and foremost*


.

----------


## Chad B

> Umm... the same people who talk about these facts don't give a damn about the people in those countries. They just use it as an excuse to say US citizens aren't so poor...
> 
> 
> Not at all. Why would I be OK with it? I'm all for the greater good. If the US was devoting the majority of it's resources to dealing with actual problems instead of fictional ones I would have absolutely no problem with it. Too bad it isn't happening.
> 
> 
> I wasn't including the upper middle class and higher in my statement. Only the poor and "normal" middle class.


O.K  :Thumps Up:

----------


## Chad B

I understand that most of the world wants to point the finger at the USA. All I am trying to explain is that ALL the countries of the world are to blame, they all just sit back and watch sex slave camps go on in Thailand, genocide in Africa…No reason, like I said if all our countries gave troops, 2 million troops would put a stop to this in one day.

----------


## Kärnfysikern

> No reason, like I said if all our countries gave troops, 2 million troops would put a stop to this in one day.


I guess the problem lies in that we would have to keep those troops there permanently because history has shown again and again that civilisation can not be forced upon people. A invasion with the best of intention always ends bloody

I would be all for sending alot more swedish peacekeepers to africa and support a much stronger UN with much more clear rights. I would not object to giving UN powers to step into situations without approvement from the local goverments.

----------


## Chad B

> I guess the problem lies in that we would have to keep those troops there permanently because history has shown again and again that civilisation can not be forced upon people. A invasion with the best of intention always ends bloody
> 
> I would be all for sending alot more swedish peacekeepers to africa and support a much stronger UN with much more clear rights. I would not object to giving UN powers to step into situations without approvement from the local goverments.


GOOD POINTS JOHAN  :Thumps Up:  

It would not be like Irack

2 million troops! There would not be a shot fired.

So just sit back and watch?

Africa was better off when it was under foreign rule. Split the countries up among civilized countries.

----------


## Chad B

> I guess the problem lies in that we would have to keep those troops there permanently because history has shown again and again that civilisation can not be forced upon people. A invasion with the best of intention always ends bloody
> 
> I would be all for sending alot more swedish peacekeepers to africa and support a much stronger UN with much more clear rights. I would not object to giving UN powers to step into situations without approvement from the local goverments.



This is a new time. Give them another chance. Set up a good government and leave, troops would go home. It would not be like Irack, it would be quick, No oil No money NO firepower, plus the people won't get a bunch of virgins for dieing.

----------


## RA

> Why do people always say things like this? I'm not a citizen of Cuba so I really don't give a damn what they do with their country. Minimum wage is lower than it has been in the last 50 years. The statistics show that people are making more money than ever, but the poor are poorer than they have been in a very long time... Various polls have shown that something like 9 out of 10 people are in favor of raising minimum wage, the only problem is certain people don't want that to happen. Guess who those people are? I'll give you a hint. They aren't in the lower or middle income brackets.


 
They also arent small business owners. You raise the minimum and those businesses lay people off. The minimum wage is a Democrat gimmick to seperate the have and have-nots. 

...and I say stuff like that because Im tired of people in this country whining about the poor. They want to see real poor people, head over to cuba. They get the minimum that a person can live on..not like in this country where you have a "poor" person that is 300lbs.

----------


## J.S.N.

> They also arent small business owners. You raise the minimum and those businesses lay people off. The minimum wage is a Democrat gimmick to seperate the have and have-nots. 
> 
> ...and I say stuff like that because Im tired of people in this country whining about the poor. They want to see real poor people, head over to cuba. They get the minimum that a person can live on..not like in this country where you have a "poor" person that is 300lbs.


just because a person is fat doesn't mean they have a good/expensive diet. in fact, you can be extremely overweight AND malnourished, which is the situation alot of these people find themselves in. AND it's a very easy thing to happen with foods derived from corn syrup being everywhere in america. shit like pasta, potatoes, soft drinks, they're all cheap and plentiful. it costs alot more to eat fish, beef, chicken, etc.

btw in cuba if you're dirt poor and you get cancer BAM they treat you for free. here in america you're dirt poor and get cancer and the best scenario you can hope for is they will treat you (it will be horrible care) now and leave you in debt until the day you die.

----------


## RA

> just because a person is fat doesn't mean they have a good/expensive diet. in fact, you can be extremely overweight AND malnourished, which is the situation alot of these people find themselves in. AND it's a very easy thing to happen with foods derived from corn syrup being everywhere in america. shit like pasta, potatoes, soft drinks, they're all cheap and plentiful. it costs alot more to eat fish, beef, chicken, etc.
> 
> btw in cuba if you're dirt poor and you get cancer BAM they treat you for free. here in america you're dirt poor and get cancer and the best scenario you can hope for is they will treat you (it will be horrible care) now and leave you in debt until the day you die.


 
Yeah, Ive heard that BS before. If you can maintain 300 unhealthy pounds you can maintain 150 healthy pounds...get my point? :Wink/Grin:  

LMAO about the cancer thing...and just like in Canada you might die before you get treatment. You cant blow that kind of smoke up my ass..lol

I live in Northern MI and we get Canadian people all the time seeking treatment because they would die or we have better specialists.

----------


## J.S.N.

actually you're completely wrong. cuba's health care system is better than canada's, and canada's is better than america's overall. also it costs less to eat a couple bags of potatos a day than it does to eat a balanced diet of fruits, vegetables, and meat like you're supposed to. so maybe you're not blowing smoke up anyone's ass, but you logic blows. peace.

----------


## RA

> actually you're completely wrong. cuba's health care system is better than canada's, and canada's is better than america's overall. also it costs less to eat a couple bags of potatos a day than it does to eat a balanced diet of fruits, vegetables, and meat like you're supposed to. so maybe you're not blowing smoke up anyone's ass, but you logic blows. peace.


Buying food to maintain 300lbs would be more expensive then buying food to maintain 150lbs. How much does it cost for a healthy choice frozen dinner? Like $3?

No way in hell Canadas healthcare is better...why do you think we have people coming here all the time for treatment?

----------


## J.S.N.

lol btw who the eff comes to northern MI for health care? no one. if someone up north is seriously ill they go to UM if they can afford it.

----------


## Logan13

> You do realize that there are 8 million Americans (citizens, not illegals) working for under $7.25/hour right? That less than $15,000 annually when working full time. You do realize that isn't enough money for anyone to live on, right? Half of these people making so little are older than 24 years old and half are also the primary income earners for their families.
> 
> That is messed up...


If everyone were paid more, everyone would have to pay more for their goods and services. Therefore, the buying power would remain unchanged. Damn, the college and high school kids that work at the local McDonald's make $7.25/hour starting out. View the US labor statistics, the vast majority of those making $7.25/hour or less are single and/or minors.

----------


## RA

> lol btw who the eff comes to northern MI for health care? no one. if someone up north is seriously ill they go to UM if they can afford it.


 
People from Canada... :Roll Eyes (Sarcastic):  Im 110 miles from the bridge and we have an excellent hospital. They are cutting edge with open hearts.

----------


## scriptfactory

> If everyone were paid more, everyone would have to pay more for their goods and services. Therefore, the buying power would remain unchanged. Damn, the college and high school kids that work at the local McDonald's make $7.25/hour starting out. *View the US labor statistics, the vast majority of those making $7.25/hour or less are single and/or minors*.


I did. Half are over 24 years old and about half are the primary income earners for their families so...

----------


## Logan13

> I did. Half are over 24 years old and about half are the primary income earners for their families so...


These people also get food stamps, gov't housing, state paid healthcare, etc... Funny thing, many of these making such little money live in a double wide with a big screen TV to watch the races on Sunday. Many others who are financially challenged have cell phones and spinners on their rims. "Poor" does not necessarily mean poor in the US.......... As roidattack pointed out, if they were that destitute, their wouldn't be a 70% obesity rate in the US. Obviously, very, very few are going hungry. The minimum wage debate is really not a debate at all, it is a politically motivated good guy vs. bad guy scenario cooked up by Democrats. Those fukking democrats!!........ :Wink/Grin:

----------


## Logan13

> I guess the problem lies in that we would have to keep those troops there permanently because history has shown again and again that civilisation can not be forced upon people. A invasion with the best of intention always ends bloody
> 
> I would be all for sending alot more swedish peacekeepers to africa and support a much stronger UN with much more clear rights. I would not object to giving UN powers to step into situations without approvement from the local goverments.


As I understand it, Denmark and Sweden have had a rather large "sex slave" trade going on there for years. Why not fix the problems in your own backyard first...remember the cautionary tale about those who live in glass houses?

----------


## J.S.N.

> As I understand it, Denmark and Sweden have had a rather large "sex slave" trade going on there for years. Why not fix the problems in your own backyard first...remember the cautionary tale about those who live in glass houses?


dude you're thinking of albania.

----------


## Prada

....



> The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings; the inherent vice of socialism is the equal sharing of miseries.
> 
> - Winston Churchill

----------


## scriptfactory

> The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings; the inherent vice of socialism is the equal sharing of miseries.
> 
> - Winston Churchill


_Communism forgets that life is individual. Capitalism forgets that life is social, and the kingdom of brotherhood is found neither in the thesis of communism nor the antithesis of capitalism but in a higher synthesis. It is found in a higher synthesis that combines the truths of both._
*-- Martin Luther King Jr.*

----------


## Chad B

> just because a person is fat doesn't mean they have a good/expensive diet. in fact, you can be extremely overweight AND malnourished, which is the situation alot of these people find themselves in. AND it's a very easy thing to happen with foods derived from corn syrup being everywhere in america. shit like pasta, potatoes, soft drinks, they're all cheap and plentiful. it costs alot more to eat fish, beef, chicken, etc.
> 
> btw in cuba if you're dirt poor and you get cancer BAM they treat you for free. here in america you're dirt poor and get cancer and the best scenario you can hope for is they will treat you (it will be horrible care) now and leave you in debt until the day you die.


Is this guy for real? Do you live in the USA? 

The only way to go hungry in the US is if you lock your self in a room, but then the police may break in, take you to a hospital and feed you.

I think there is a lot of false hype going around internationally about the US. Spread by commi *******

----------


## Chad B

> just because a person is fat doesn't mean they have a good/expensive diet. in fact, you can be extremely overweight AND malnourished, which is the situation alot of these people find themselves in. AND it's a very easy thing to happen with foods derived from corn syrup being everywhere in america. shit like pasta, potatoes, soft drinks, they're all cheap and plentiful. it costs alot more to eat fish, beef, chicken, etc.
> 
> btw in cuba if you're dirt poor and you get cancer BAM they treat you for free. here in america you're dirt poor and get cancer and the best scenario you can hope for is they will treat you (it will be horrible care) now and leave you in debt until the day you die.


Have you ever heard of food stampes? See the US gov gives these to anybody who asks for them. Food stamps are like money but you can only buy food with them. Any food you want Chicken, Steak...

Try talking out of your other hole.  :Smilie:

----------


## Chad B

> just because a person is fat doesn't mean they have a good/expensive diet. in fact, you can be extremely overweight AND malnourished, which is the situation alot of these people find themselves in. AND it's a very easy thing to happen with foods derived from corn syrup being everywhere in america. shit like pasta, potatoes, soft drinks, they're all cheap and plentiful. it costs alot more to eat fish, beef, chicken, etc.
> 
> btw in cuba if you're dirt poor and you get cancer BAM they treat you for free. here in america you're dirt poor and get cancer and the best scenario you can hope for is they will treat you (it will be horrible care) now and leave you in debt until the day you die.


Is this why drift boats full of Cubans wash up on the Florida shores? Hundreds of thousands of Cubans risking there life on rafts with no motor or sails, praying the currants take them to the Free America. For if they touch ground USA law makes them citizens.


Or maybe boats full of americans washing up on the cuba shores.  :LOL:

----------


## RA

> ....


 

Great quote prada

----------


## J.S.N.

> Have you ever heard of food stampes? See the US gov gives these to anybody who asks for them. Food stamps are like money but you can only buy food with them. Any food you want Chicken, Steak...
> 
> Try talking out of your other hole.


okay i'll use you own logic. why are there soup kitchens in the US? if everyone has enought to eat then why are there soup kitchens?

btw you can use food stamps any way you want, but you only have so many of them. i did a little digging and found out that in california, for example, the maximum amount of food stamps you can recieve is $5 a day. ref. so no, you cannot eat chicken, steak etc.

----------


## Chad B

> okay i'll use you own logic. why are there soup kitchens in the US? if everyone has enought to eat then why are there soup kitchens?
> 
> btw you can use food stamps any way you want, but you only have so many of them. i did a little digging and found out that in california, for example, the maximum amount of food stamps you can recieve is $5 a day. ref. so no, you cannot eat chicken, steak etc.


Soup kitchens are mostly for homeless people who dont have means of cooking food. 

Not only do we give food stamps but we give food boxes, once a week you can go get a couple of boxes full of food.

May I please ask were you live?

----------


## Chad B

> okay i'll use you own logic. why are there soup kitchens in the US? if everyone has enought to eat then why are there soup kitchens?
> 
> btw you can use food stamps any way you want, but you only have so many of them. i did a little digging and found out that in california, for example, the maximum amount of food stamps you can recieve is $5 a day. ref. so no, you cannot eat chicken, steak etc.


$5 will get you over 3 pounds of chicken, enough chicken for a few days.

----------


## J.S.N.

> Soup kitchens are mostly for homeless people who dont have means of cooking food. 
> 
> Not only do we give food stamps but we give food boxes, once a week you can go get a couple of boxes full of food.
> 
> May I please ask were you live?


you can ask but i won't tell. you have to guess. 

and btw you try live on $5 a day for food. not just this magical deal with chicken that lasts three days, i'm talking vegetables with actual micronutrients, starches for energy, etc.

----------


## Chad B

[QUOTE=J.S.N.]you can ask but i won't tell. you have to guess. 

Veg are on sale for $1 a pound, sometimes less. 10 pound bag of potato for $3

Remember food stamps are just one of the feeding programs, we give big food boxes every week, there are also many churches and private org. giving away food weekly, even paying for hotels for homeless people. My friends mom has section 8, she only pays $80 a month for a 3 bedroom house and an private org delivers food to her door every week! , USA sure is a good place to be!

My guess is CANADA or at a university in the USA

----------


## Chad B

> you can ask but i won't tell. you have to guess. 
> 
> and btw you try live on $5 a day for food. not just this magical deal with chicken that lasts three days, i'm talking vegetables with actual micronutrients, starches for energy, etc.



Magic? I was just at the store, Whole 3 pound uncooked dressed chicken for $3.50

----------


## mcpeepants

> GOOD POINTS JOHAN  
> 
> It would not be like Irack
> 
> 2 million troops! There would not be a shot fired.
> 
> So just sit back and watch?
> 
> Africa was better off when it was under foreign rule. Split the countries up among civilized countries.


Better off. Africans were either be looted, used as slave labor, or being "civilized" by foreigner. Europeans weren't ruling Africa to help them out, they were there for wealth.

----------


## Chad B

> Better off. Africans were either be looted, used as slave labor, or being "civilized" by foreigner. Europeans weren't ruling Africa to help them out, they were there for wealth.


So now a mother goes to get water for her family and when she gets to the water well there are soliders there who rape her then give her water. If the husband was to go they would kill him, so she is forced to get water and a raping when her child needs water. 

Like I said, they were better of under Foreign Rule. PERIOD

----------


## Prada

> Great quote prada


It's by Winston Churchill, he has a lot of colorful comments. The credit belongs to him.

I didn't want to enter this debate because, I reiterate, it's futile however I think a few are oblivious to the fact that of all these states, mentioned herein, none is pure capitalistic nor socialist. They are only tilted somewhat more towards another. The capitalism we see today is not "pure' the way Adam Smith described it I believe in The Wealth of Nations. It is this laissez faire attitude that is harmful and without ANY governement intervention quite anarchaic actually. Letting the "invisible hand" venture and being guided by common citizens is taking for granted the intentions of these citizens. I think in his theory, Smith, under-estimated greed and overestimated goodwill of humans. Somewhat of an idealist.

As far as Karl Marx and his idealogy of Socialism, well under that where free markets, enterprises etc would be abolished and much would me state controlled. Where is the incentive to work harder if all results will be shared equally? I've always believed that socialism doesnt enourage creativity, perseverence and sharing of intellectual thoughts and minds. Hence that is the reciprocal of an apex or the most important drawback of socialism. Assuming that all humans are alike is incorrect. Assuming that all will work as hard and have the same inputs into society yet will derive the same outputs. What incentive does one have a increasing his productivity if it yields the same result, or almost the same. A successful state where all citizens share the fruits of their labour and all will be content is also a utopian idealogy.

Hence a combination of the two is what has proven to suit society best. Hence the the question that looms is what degree of governement intervention is deemed acceptable?

----------


## Chad B

> you can ask but i won't tell. you have to guess. 
> 
> and btw you try live on $5 a day for food. not just this magical deal with chicken that lasts three days, i'm talking vegetables with actual micronutrients, starches for energy, etc.


Must be the UK because everything cost so much over there.

----------


## mcpeepants

> So now a mother goes to get water for her family and when she gets to the water well there are soliders there who rape her then give her water. If the husband was to go they would kill him, so she is forced to get water and a raping when her child needs water. 
> 
> Like I said, they were better of under Foreign Rule. PERIOD


Don't paint africa with one brush. And don't forget rape happens everywhere including the West. Women get raped a lot in the US, I don't think we're clamoring to be ruled by British. 

So why do think they were better off under colonial rule? The European ruled Africa to line their pockets. I don't think millions of central africans who exploited, enslaved and killed under King Leopold the seconds rule thought life was better under foreign rule.

----------


## Chad B

> It's by Winston Churchill, he has a lot of colorful comments. The credit belongs to him.
> 
> I didn't want to enter this debate because, I reiterate, it's futile however I think a few are oblivious to the fact that of all these states, mentioned herein, none is pure capitalistic nor socialist. They are only tilted somewhat more towards another. The capitalism we see today is not "pure' the way Adam Smith described it I believe in The Wealth of Nations. It is this laissez faire attitude that is harmful and without ANY governement intervention quite anarchaic actually. Letting the "invisible hand" venture and being guided by common citizens is taking for granted the intentions of these citizens. I think in his theory, Smith, under-estimated greed and overestimated goodwill of humans. Somewhat of an idealist.
> 
> As far as Karl Marx and his idealogy of Socialism, well under that where free markets, enterprises etc would be abolished and much would me state controlled. Where is the incentive to work harder if all results will be shared equally? I've always believed that socialism doesnt enourage creativity, perseverence and sharing of intellectual thoughts and minds. Hence that is the reciprocal of an apex or the most important drawback of socialism. Assuming that all humans are alike is incorrect. Assuming that all will work as hard and have the same inputs into society yet will derive the same outputs. What incentive does one have a increasing his productivity if it yields the same result, or almost the same. A successful state where all citizens share the fruits of their labour and all will be content is also a utopian idealogy.
> 
> Hence a combination of the two is what has proven to suit society best. Hence the the question that looms is what degree of governement intervention is deemed acceptable?


Good post  :Thumps Up:

----------


## Chad B

> Don't paint africa with one brush. And don't forget rape happens everywhere including the West. Women get raped a lot in the US, I don't think we're clamoring to be ruled by British. 
> 
> So why do think they were better off under colonial rule? The European ruled Africa to line their pockets. I don't think millions of central africans who exploited, enslaved and killed under King Leopold the seconds rule thought life was better under foreign rule.


You do know what is going on over there RIGHT? Seems like you don't so here is a article I cut and pasted.


All of our experts vehemently agree that Sudan has long been suffering in extremis, and that the international community has the obligation to intervene.

*Since early 2003, the government of Sudan has been waging a campaign of genocide against targeted African communities in Darfur, western Sudan.* In September 2004, the Bush Administration rightfully recognized that genocide was taking place in Darfur, yet the U.S. has failed to respond to this crisis with the urgency that is required. As the death toll in Darfur continues to mount, it is clear that nothing short of international intervention can protect the people of Darfur and stop this genocide. 

*Over 450,000 people have lost their lives in Darfur since the genocide began. More than 2.5 million people have been displaced, their livelihoods and villages destroyed by government forces and their proxy militias, and many thousands of women and girls have been raped by these forces.* Recent reports confirm that the government-sponsored violence continues in Darfur, and that the security situation is deteriorating. The humanitarian crisis that forms part of the genocide is escalating, as *the government of Sudan continues to obstruct humanitarian operations, creating famine conditions for millions of vulnerable people.*

As the genocide continues, our most important priority must be to provide protection to the people of Darfur. The African Union (AU) has shown important leadership, and its mission in Darfur is doing what it can in the face of growing insecurity. But the AU cannot address this crisis alone, nor should it have to. Genocide is an international crime, and it requires an urgent international response. 

*Unless there is an immediate international intervention in Darfur, up to a million people may be dead by the end of this year.* An international intervention is essential to support the AUs efforts, and can achieve four critical purposes: (1) stop the killing and provide security for millions of internally displaced people (IDPs); (2) facilitate the urgent delivery of humanitarian assistance; (3) enforce the AU cease-fire established by the Darfur Peace Agreement between the government of Sudan and one of the rebel groups; and (4) facilitate the voluntary return of IDPs to their land and the reconstruction of their homes by providing a secure environment.

*The U.S. is the only government that has rightfully recognized that genocide is taking place in Darfur*, and this brings with it a unique obligation to act. The U.S. also has a unique capacity, as the most powerful country in the world, to assert strong leadership and encourage international action to protect civilians and stop the genocide in Darfur.

The Bush Administration has provided humanitarian assistance for Darfur, and has given limited logistical support to the African Union mission, but it has failed to mount an urgent response to the ongoing genocide. The Bush Administration has equivocated on Darfur in part because it wishes to maintain an intelligence-sharing partnership with the Khartoum government in the interests of the so-called War on Terror. But genocide is a unique crime and it requires a unique and urgent response. Thousands of lives can still be saved if action is taken now.

Africa Actions Campaign to Stop Genocide in Darfur is calling on the U.S. to work with the United Nations (UN) to provide the African Union force with a strong mandate under the UN Charter to enable it to protect civilians. Africa Action is also calling on the U.S. to seek a UN resolution authorizing a multinational intervention force to support the AU and protect the people of Darfur. 

*Just over a decade ago*, the U.S. blocked international action as genocide unfolded in Rwanda, and *800,000 lives were lost.* Government officials who remained silent during the Rwandan genocide often claim that if Americans had clamored for more government action, the U.S. would have had to work with the UN to intervene, and could have saved hundreds of thousands of lives. Today, this provides Americans with unique power to protect the people of Darfur. We must push the U.S. to do everything necessary to ensure a multinational intervention force to stop the genocide in Darfur as a critical first step to bringing peace and stability to this troubled region. 

Check out our Campaign Updates for more information on our current initiatives to change U.S. policy on this issue.


Ripples of Genocide: Journey Through Eastern Congo, chronicling the devastation unfolding in the eastern part of the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC). The U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum's Committee on Conscience, in cooperation with Angelina Jolie and the International Crisis Group, launched an online exhibition, The site includes a teachers guide to aid educators in developing lessons on the country's situation. *"Since 1998, more than 3.5 million people have died in the Democratic Republic of the Congo,"* states Jerry Fowler, Director of the Museum's Committee on Conscience. *"More people have died in this conflict than in any other since World War II, but it has received scant attention in the U.S., and few Americans are aware of its massive scope."*The war in Congo began in 1996, and with only a brief period of peace, reignited in 1998. For civilians, particularly in the east, the results are devastating. *A mortality study by the International Rescue Committee estimates that between 1998 and 2004, approximately 3.8 million deaths have occurred as a result of the way.* The number of deaths continues to rise. It is the deadliest conflict since World War II. www.ushmm.org/museum/exhibit/online/congojournal 

Sondra Hale, Professor of Anthropology and Womens Studies at UCLA and co-editor of the forthcoming Perspectives on Genocide in Sudan, agrees with Deng that the prohibition of language, destruction of books, documents, monuments, and religious objects constitutes "cultural genocide." She argues that "the intentional war of attrition against the Nuba has the effect of genocide," and highlights sex crimes and other forms of repression directed at women.

----------


## Chad B

> Don't paint africa with one brush. And don't forget rape happens everywhere including the West. Women get raped a lot in the US, I don't think we're clamoring to be ruled by British.


Hundreds of women are being raped by soliders every day. How can you compare that to USA. Are there Police in the USA raping hundreds of 14ish year old girls daily, NO.

They would be better off under European or American rule.

I say go in there and kill these child rapist and set up a new gov.

----------


## mcpeepants

> You do know what is going on over there RIGHT? Seems like you don't so here is a article I cut and pasted.
> 
> 
> All of our experts vehemently agree that Sudan has long been suffering in extremis, and that the international community has the obligation to intervene.
> 
> Since early 2003, the government of Sudan has been waging a campaign of genocide against targeted African communities in Darfur, western Sudan. In September 2004, the Bush Administration rightfully recognized that genocide was taking place in Darfur, yet the U.S. has failed to respond to this crisis with the urgency that is required. As the death toll in Darfur continues to mount, it is clear that nothing short of international intervention can protect the people of Darfur and stop this genocide. 
> 
> *Over 450,000 people have lost their lives in Darfur since the genocide began. More than 2.5 million people have been displaced, their livelihoods and villages destroyed by government forces and their proxy militias, and many thousands of women and girls have been raped by these forces.* Recent reports confirm that the government-sponsored violence continues in Darfur, and that the security situation is deteriorating. The humanitarian crisis that forms part of the genocide is escalating, as *the government of Sudan continues to obstruct humanitarian operations, creating famine conditions for millions of vulnerable people.*
> 
> ...


I'm well aware of what's going on in Darfur cause I do pay attention to the news. Also, I am from Uganda, which borders Sudan to the south. However, just jumping in the situation without understanding the history and grievences will lead to disaster. The darfur conflict is first and foremost a battle of resources. The Janjaweed who are backed by Sudan are cattle keepers while the other Darfurians are mostly farmers. They are fighting over water and land use. The most important things do is to protect the civillians and that can be done by financially supporting AU troops. To solve the conflict, we address how to fairly split the land resources. We can not overlook the fact that Sudan is fearful of our real intentions of the West. They were that we want to split the oil and resource rich South from Sudan. They can see how Iraq is shattering into pieces after the presence of US, British, and their allies troops.

----------


## mcpeepants

> Hundreds of women are being raped by soliders every day. How can you compare that to USA. Are there Police in the USA raping hundreds of 14ish year old girls daily, NO.
> 
> They would be better off under European or American rule.
> 
> I say go in there and kill these child rapist and set up a new gov.


I wasn't saying police were doing it. I'm just saying their is a lot of rape. Europeans governments and business were exploiting and looting Africa. How is that better? Do think they were like I'm being worked as a slave and many of my friends and family have been killed, but I least someone's making money off me?

----------


## J.S.N.

no you're wrong about where i'm from in all guesses and 3lbs. uncooked chicken does not yield 3lbs of cooked food. you're prolly talking about one of those nasty ass whole dressed chickens with the bones and skin and shit- ick that shit is for pleb's. i wouldn't eat that if you put a gun to my head. no one should have to eat that. except maybe minorities.

----------


## Chad B

> I wasn't saying police were doing it. I'm just saying their is a lot of rape. Europeans governments and business were exploiting and looting Africa. How is that better? Do think they were like I'm being worked as a slave and many of my friends and family have been killed, but I least someone's making money off me?


It is not better, but not as bad a genocide, hence the better off. 

It is all bad, to bad the world is the way it is  :Cry:  

To bad the world can sit back and watch this going on without intervening.  :Frown:

----------


## Phreak101

> and how, pray tell, does that apply to the real world? you can work "full time" (39.5hrs.) at a place like wal-mart and home depot right now for minimum wage and not make enough money to support yourself, much less a spouse and 2.5 kids, much less china where it's so much worse.


That's not true at all. I know plenty of people who do. Besides, Home Depot pays 10.50 an hour starting.

----------


## Chad B

> no you're wrong about where i'm from in all guesses and 3lbs. uncooked chicken does not yield 3lbs of cooked food. you're prolly talking about one of those nasty ass whole dressed chickens with the bones and skin and shit- ick that shit is for pleb's. i wouldn't eat that if you put a gun to my head. no one should have to eat that. except maybe minorities.



Costco has skinless boneless chicken breast for $2 a pound. I just ate some  :Wink: 

Please please tell me were you live.  :Smilie:

----------


## Chad B

> no you're wrong about where i'm from in all guesses and 3lbs. uncooked chicken does not yield 3lbs of cooked food. you're prolly talking about one of those nasty ass whole dressed chickens with the bones and skin and shit- ick that shit is for pleb's. i wouldn't eat that if you put a gun to my head. no one should have to eat that. except maybe minorities.


EUROPE  :Wink/Grin:

----------


## J.S.N.

europe's a big place. you can't just guess the whole continent.

----------


## mcpeepants

> It is not better, but not as bad a genocide, hence the better off. 
> 
> It is all bad, to bad the world is the way it is  
> 
> To bad the world can sit back and watch this going on without intervening.


Again give me numbers to compare the why the genocide and oppression of the past. I agree the world needs to do more but shooting people doesn't solve problems. Simple measures could help change Africa dramatically. Free mosquito nets, free malaria treatment, AIDS education and treatment, better irrigation and farming techniques will help the continent more than bullets will. Also, aid must be direct to the people not to the corrupt governments.

----------


## Phreak101

> Again give me numbers to compare the why the genocide and oppression of the past. I agree the world needs to do more but shooting people doesn't solve problems. Simple measures could help change Africa dramatically. Free mosquito nets, free malaria treatment, AIDS education and treatment, better irrigation and farming techniques will help the continent more than bullets will. Also, aid must be direct to the people not to the corrupt governments.


For once, totally agree

----------


## Kärnfysikern

> As I understand it, Denmark and Sweden have had a rather large "sex slave" trade going on there for years. Why not fix the problems in your own backyard first...remember the cautionary tale about those who live in glass houses?


Relevance??

large is a very relative term. Large as in it exists. In the northern sweden border towns against finland there are plenty of russian hookers ect.

But how does that compare to mass genocide in africa? Sending troops to africa would not interfere with police work in sweden.

BTW I seem to remember a country with pretty high violent crime rates that still run around playing world police  :Wink:

----------


## Kärnfysikern

> _Communism forgets that life is individual. Capitalism forgets that life is social, and the kingdom of brotherhood is found neither in the thesis of communism nor the antithesis of capitalism but in a higher synthesis. It is found in a higher synthesis that combines the truths of both._
> *-- Martin Luther King Jr.*


 :Clap:   :Thumps Up:

----------


## Phreak101

> I'm with you also. I think there should be a flat tax rate. The only problem is in the US there are special tax laws. Like the ones for investors. Money made from capital gains (i.e. investments) get special tax breaks. This is great for rich people because the majority of their income doesn't come from wages, it comes from things investments.
> 
> Hell, there is like $300 billion dollars a year in tax fraud, most of it coming from corporations and rich individuals and they are almost never prosecuted. I think much more should be done to prosecute these people. The average working class poor person is three times more likely to be audited than a wealthy person ($100k+ annual salary) even though the wealthy person is like 100x more like to commit tax fraud. The funny thing is, there are less and less audits taking place among the rich. Why is that?


You make a very good point about flat tax rates, however it's not just "rich people", it's people who have money because they are business owners. The fallacy here is that the very same tax laws instituted to help the middle class are hurting the middle class because they don't have the write off's business owner's do.

If you make more than $75,000 a year in the U.S., you are taxed at 38%. That is assinine. That means I work from January to April to pay my taxes, and I'm supposed to believe some democrat telling me that the "rich" need to be taxed more??

Flat tax all the way, very good quote by MLK btw. Kinda puts our heated debate tor est, doesn't it.  :Wink/Grin:

----------


## Logan13

> Relevance??
> 
> large is a very relative term. Large as in it exists. In the northern sweden border towns against finland there are plenty of russian hookers ect.
> 
> But how does that compare to mass genocide in africa? Sending troops to africa would not interfere with police work in sweden.
> 
> BTW I seem to remember a country with pretty high violent crime rates that still run around playing world police


As opposed to a country that does nothing except point fingers? So now you want to send troops into Africa, eh. Why don't you start by sending in the Swedish army. Let you pansies pull some of the weight for once......... As for revelance, as I have said before, I will share the finger-pointing wealth with the rest of the members' country of origin in here. Do not like it when the spotlight is turned on mother sweden, do ya? Regardless, you are still my favorite pacifist. :Wink/Grin:

----------


## Kärnfysikern

> As opposed to a country that does nothing except point fingers? So now you want to send troops into Africa, eh. Why don't you start by sending in the Swedish army. Let you pansies pull some of the weight for once......... As for revelance, as I have said before, I will share the finger-pointing wealth with the rest of the members' country of origin in here. Do not like it when the spotlight is turned on mother sweden, do ya? Regardless, you are still my favorite pacifist.


Well sweden has peacekeepers in the middle east and in africa and our army is very well trained. Im sure bouncer could have verified that since I seem to remember he has worked with swedish un tropps.

I dont mind anyone pointing fingers at my country since we are far less hypocritical than the countries I point my finger at  :Wink:  I support sending tropps into all kinds of peacekeeping missions. I dont support stupid wars  :Big Grin:

----------


## Logan13

> Well sweden has peacekeepers in the middle east and in africa and our army is very well trained. Im sure bouncer could have verified that since I seem to remember he has worked with swedish un tropps.
> 
> I dont mind anyone pointing fingers at my country since we are far less hypocritical than the countries I point my finger at  I support sending tropps into all kinds of peacekeeping missions. I dont support stupid wars


That would not be a peacekeeping mission. These African warlords have alot to loose financially, they will resist. When they resist, the Swedish army will have to resort to more than name calling to protect themselves. Although they will most definately have other nation's troops with them since we all know that they will not go in alone, no matter how "right" they thought their plight was.

----------


## scriptfactory

> You make a very good point about flat tax rates, however it's not just "rich people", it's *people who have money because they are business owners*. The fallacy here is that the very same tax laws instituted to help the middle class are hurting the middle class because they don't have the write off's business owner's do.
> 
> If you make more than $75,000 a year in the U.S., you are taxed at 38%. That is assinine. That means I work from January to April to pay my taxes, and I'm supposed to believe some democrat telling me that the "rich" need to be taxed more??


That's pretty much what I was referring to. I am not an expert in taxes but it seems to me there are big problems there that need to be resolved.




> Flat tax all the way, very good quote by MLK btw. *Kinda puts our heated debate tor est, doesn't it*.


Pretty much, right?  :LOL:  Too bad neither of us are smart enough to know how to create that perfect society. I believe it can happen, but not any time soon...

----------


## Prada

> Good post




Thanks, just clarifying some rudimentry notions. :Wink/Grin:

----------


## Prada

This thread has gone on a few tangents.........
I think we(the west) are quite ignorant as to the history and what has been going on in Africa which all commenced back in the days of impearlism and expansionism. In some cases these colonies were redrawn and societies segmented. Even Kashmir is a perfect example, albeit in Asia. Yet we never fully comprehended these societies or cultures and now we are trying to get into something we are completly oblivious to and in some cases forcefully so. Samething was done with Clinton and Rwanda. I do not believe peace keepers are neccessairly the answer.

----------


## Chad B

> Well sweden has peacekeepers in the middle east and in africa and our army is very well trained. Im sure bouncer could have verified that since I seem to remember he has worked with swedish un tropps.
> 
> I dont mind anyone pointing fingers at my country since we are far less hypocritical than the countries I point my finger at  I support sending tropps into all kinds of peacekeeping missions. I dont support stupid wars


The point of all my replies is that nobody should be pointing fingers, all of our Governments are corrupt. 

USA has to play world police because we are the world power and that comes with responsibility. I think we could be doing a better job but none the less if it wasnt for us all of Europe would be under Hitler Germany. We helped stop genocide in Bosina, Rwanda...and a lot of other stuff.

I dont agree or disagree with the Irack War because I dont know the true facts, but I do know that if the USA feels threatened by any country the USA will kick there ass. The USA blew Irack away faster than lighting without any substantial number of American casualties, the occupation is where the American Causalities came in, trying to create them a free Government. The truth is that if Irack becomes a self standing free government history will see Bush as a hero and all the Bush bashers will be forgotten. 

Is liberating a country stupid? Even if some dont want it, what about the few who do? I just love that bravehart movie FREDOMMMMMMMM

----------


## scriptfactory

> USA has to play world police because we are the world power and that comes with responsibility. *I think we could be doing a better job but none the less if it wasnt for us all of Europe would be under Hitler Germany*. We helped stop genocide in Bosina, Rwanda...and a lot of other stuff.


I just have to respond to this real quick. Hitler was already on his way down. The Russians had taken care of a very big part of the war, the US just resolved things more quickly. Europe was never in danger of Hitler rule because Hitler was a really crappy military commander who thought he was the next Alexander.

----------


## RA

> I just have to respond to this real quick. Hitler was already on his way down. The Russians had taken care of a very big part of the war, the US just resolved things more quickly. Europe was never in danger of Hitler rule because Hitler was a really crappy military commander who thought he was the next Alexander.


 
 :Roll Eyes (Sarcastic):   :Bs:  


btw, this thread is turning into another America bash.

----------


## Kärnfysikern

> Although they will most definately have other nation's troops with them since we all know that they will not go in alone, no matter how "right" they thought their plight was.


Once again you fail to grasp the concept of size. A country of swedens size doesnt run around and do international things alone. Simply because we are only a country of 9 million inhabitants.





> I think we could be doing a better job but none the less if it wasnt for us all of Europe would be under Hitler Germany.


I se this mentioned just about every time europe and america is discussed. Withour Russia hitler would have won, without the americans europe would have been stalins playing ground, without UK hitler might have won and so on...

But the russians did do the brunt of the work, most of the killing and certainly most of the dying in defeating nazi germany. One mad dictator lost and another mad **** won. Europes biggest debt to america is that it put a stop to stalins expansion. But russia gets the credit for defeating germany.





> I dont agree or disagree with the Irack War because I dont know the true facts, but I do know that if the USA feels threatened by any country the USA will kick there ass. The USA blew Irack away faster than lighting without any substantial number of American casualties, the occupation is where the American Causalities came in, trying to create them a free Government. The truth is that if Irack becomes a self standing free government history will see Bush as a hero and all the Bush bashers will be forgotten.


Well I for one hope iraq will turn out well. But it doesnt look like it will anytime soon...




> Is liberating a country stupid? Even if some dont want it, what about the few who do? I just love that bravehart movie FREDOMMMMMMMM


Well I dont think its wrong if there is a realistic chanse of success. But iraq seems far less stable now than under sadam. Now it seems to be close to civil war and terrorist breeding ground number one. If america leaves iraq will be Irans playing ground, if america stays its going to be a long and grinding resource drain and a constant target for fanatics.

----------


## Kärnfysikern

> I just have to respond to this real quick. Hitler was already on his way down. The Russians had taken care of a very big part of the war, the US just resolved things more quickly. Europe was never in danger of Hitler rule because Hitler was a really crappy military commander who thought he was the next Alexander.


But no america would also have meant that stalin would have added a few more countries to his union. I think living under stalin would have been worse than living under hitler.

----------


## Kärnfysikern

> btw, this thread is turning into another America bash.


Yeah it sure went offtopic.

----------


## Logan13

> Once again you fail to grasp the concept of size. A country of swedens size doesnt run around and do international things alone. Simply because we are only a country of 9 million inhabitants.


For a self-proclaimed small country, Sweden sure has some mighty big opinions. In the US we call this the aligator mouth with a hummingbird ass syndrom.

----------


## Phreak101

> For a self-proclaimed small country, Sweden sure has some mighty big opinions. In the US we call this the aligator mouth with a hummingbird ass syndrom.


 :Haha:   :LOL:  

I love this group, all you guys make my days so much better.

----------


## Kärnfysikern

> For a self-proclaimed small country, Sweden sure has some mighty big opinions. In the US we call this the aligator mouth with a hummingbird ass syndrom.


Yes offcourse I forgot, people in smaller countries are inherently more stupid and should not comment on world issues since only the big boys know what its all about  :Roll Eyes (Sarcastic):

----------


## scriptfactory

> But no america would also have meant that stalin would have added a few more countries to his union. I think living under stalin would have been worse than living under hitler.


Good point.

----------


## Logan13

> Yes offcourse I forgot, people in smaller countries are inherently more stupid and should not comment on world issues since only the big boys know what its all about


NOW you are catchin' on! :Wink/Grin:  But I honestly think that only those who participate are entitled to an opinion........ The world could do w/out so many arm-chair quarterbacks.

----------


## Chad B

> I just have to respond to this real quick. Hitler was already on his way down. The Russians had taken care of a very big part of the war, the US just resolved things more quickly. Europe was never in danger of Hitler rule because Hitler was a really crappy military commander who thought he was the next Alexander.


The A bomb on japan stoped the war. IMO

----------


## Chad B

> Again give me numbers to compare the why the genocide and oppression of the past. I agree the world needs to do more but shooting people doesn't solve problems. Simple measures could help change Africa dramatically. Free mosquito nets, free malaria treatment, AIDS education and treatment, better irrigation and farming techniques will help the continent more than bullets will. Also, aid must be direct to the people not to the corrupt governments.



Here in America we like to shoot people who rape 14 year old girls repeatedly then kill them. What do you want to do with them, feed them milk and honey and send them to counseling? 

Numbers smombers, we can talk, talk, talk just like you liberals like to do.  :Lame:  

The point is that if the Whole world gave troops, 2 or even 3 Million troops would put an end to the mass genocide in a couple days with no substantial causalities. Do you realize what 3 million troops would look like? There might not even be a shot fired! We can deal with the civilians after, lets just stop the mass killing of our fellow humans NOW. 

While all the countries of the world sit and watch thousands of women and children raped and starved by soldiers daily, when they have the power to stop it in a day or two. They are all hypocrites, and they are all shit, one might smell worse than the other but how can a piece of shit call another piece of shit smellier? Your government, my government, all SHIT! Allow this to go on in the world.  :Mad:

----------


## Chad B

> Again give me numbers to compare the why the genocide and oppression of the past. I agree the world needs to do more but shooting people doesn't solve problems. Simple measures could help change Africa dramatically. Free mosquito nets, free malaria treatment, AIDS education and treatment, better irrigation and farming techniques will help the continent more than bullets will. Also, aid must be direct to the people not to the corrupt governments.


Sometime the only way to solve a problem is by shooting people. We have a lot of liberals here who just want to talk with the Hitler in Iran. How can you talk with a guy who says in his speeches that Israel and its allies need to be wiped off of the face of the earth? I cant believe we are just sitting here waiting for him to get a nuclear power so he can bomb us, if it wasnt for the liberal Americans wanting to reason with this Hitler he would have been toast by now. I tell you these liberals will be the death of us all, and the fall of America, I pray not.

----------


## Kärnfysikern

> The point is that if the Whole world gave troops, 2 or even 3 Million troops would put an end to the mass genocide in a couple days with no substantial causalities. Do you realize what 3 million troops would look like? There might not even be a shot fired! We can deal with the civilians after, lets just stop the mass killing of our fellow humans NOW. 
> 
> While all the countries of the world sit and watch thousands of women and children raped and starved by soldiers daily, when they have the power to stop it in a day or two. They are all hypocrites, and they are all shit, one might smell worse than the other but how can a piece of shit call another piece of shit smellier? Your government, my government, all SHIT! Allow this to go on in the world.


Thats why we need a strong UN that have the authority to take any steps it needs to end conflicts regardless of the local authorities. A strong UN with a standing well equipped army and a UN where rouge nations can not be in the security councill, where the big powers doesnt have veto right anymore ect. It needs to be updated badly.





> Sometime the only way to solve a problem is by shooting people. We have a lot of liberals here who just want to talk with the Hitler in Iran. How can you talk with a guy who says in his speeches that Israel and its allies need to be wiped off of the face of the earth? I cant believe we are just sitting here waiting for him to get a nuclear power so he can bomb us, if it wasnt for the liberal Americans wanting to reason with this Hitler he would have been toast by now. I tell you these liberals will be the death of us all, and the fall of America, I pray not.


Saying israel will disapear from the pages of time is a lot different then saying israel should be wiped of the map and ahmajidenad acctualy said pages of time. Most of the thing he have said is indeed bad, but not as bad as the major newspapers have translated it.
It doesnt matter much anyway what he say since he is just a puppet when it comes to the armed forces, its the ayatholla that runs that show...Iran is also by almost all accounts several years from beeing able to acctualy build a bomb so no need to rush this situation before exhausting all other possible options  :Smilie:

----------


## mcpeepants

> Here in America we like to shoot people who rape 14 year old girls repeatedly then kill them. What do you want to do with them, feed them milk and honey and send them to counseling? 
> 
> Numbers smombers, we can talk, talk, talk just like you liberals like to do.  
> 
> The point is that if the Whole world gave troops, 2 or even 3 Million troops would put an end to the mass genocide in a couple days with no substantial causalities. Do you realize what 3 million troops would look like? There might not even be a shot fired! We can deal with the civilians after, lets just stop the mass killing of our fellow humans NOW. 
> 
> While all the countries of the world sit and watch thousands of women and children raped and starved by soldiers daily, when they have the power to stop it in a day or two. They are all hypocrites, and they are all shit, one might smell worse than the other but how can a piece of shit call another piece of shit smellier? Your government, my government, all SHIT! Allow this to go on in the world.


More people are dying because of starvation, lack of clean water, and disease than by war. What are 3 million troops going to do? Unless their going to be used to pick up some ploughs and or bring medicine, their not going to much. So if your thinking of sending troops, first realize most deaths are not the result of bullets.

----------


## Kärnfysikern

> More people are dying because of starvation, lack of clean water, and disease than by war. What are 3 million troops going to do? Unless their going to be used to pick up some ploughs and or bring medicine, their not going to much. So if your thinking of sending troops, first realize most deaths are not the result of bullets.



and in that case the world is acctualy doing alot. The un is saving alot of lifes with there food programs, with education and with medication.

The only downside is that often the help might end up under the warlords controll. There needs to be a armed presence with authority along with the big aid shipments to always ensure it wont just give the warlords more power  :Frown:

----------


## mcpeepants

> Sometime the only way to solve a problem is by shooting people. We have a lot of liberals here who just want to talk with the Hitler in Iran. How can you talk with a guy who says in his speeches that Israel and its allies need to be wiped off of the face of the earth? I cant believe we are just sitting here waiting for him to get a nuclear power so he can bomb us, if it wasnt for the liberal Americans wanting to reason with this Hitler he would have been toast by now. I tell you these liberals will be the death of us all, and the fall of America, I pray not.


Hitler. Man everybody's Hitler these days. People need to put things in perspective and not get worked up over paranoia. The case we're making against Iran is the same we made for Iraq. We can see how good the turned out. Iran wants and needs diplomatic relations with the US if it wants to advance it's infrastructure. You were saying before all goverments are shit, so maybe you should take a whiff before believing what our goverment is saying.

----------


## mcpeepants

> and in that case the world is acctualy doing alot. The un is saving alot of lifes with there food programs, with education and with medication.
> 
> The only downside is that often the help might end up under the warlords controll. There needs to be a armed presence with authority along with the big aid shipments to always ensure it wont just give the warlords more power


Yeah, the UN needs to be give aid directly to the people. Don't give aid to corrupt governments and expect it to trickle down to the people.

----------


## RA

> NOW you are catchin' on! But I honestly think that only those who participate are entitled to an opinion........ The world could do w/out so many arm-chair quarterbacks.


 

Americaarmchairquarterbackitus. Commonly afflicts Europeans. No known cure at this time. :Wink/Grin:

----------


## Kärnfysikern

> NOW you are catchin' on! But I honestly think that only those who participate are entitled to an opinion........ The world could do w/out so many arm-chair quarterbacks.


So if I beat down a homeless bum you cant have a oppinion about it since you didnt participate  :Don't know: 

Offcourse I can have oppinions about the stupid moves the world powers make.  :Wink/Grin:  
They are not immune to critique, it just happen that right now its america that is doing the stupid moves. If this was during the cold war I would be just as critical about what moves the soviet union make or in 30 years Il probably be very critical to chinas actions.

Big powers do things to further there own interests and thats obvious, but if americas interests isnt in my interest or if america is trying to claim its interests is a nobel cause, then I will critique. There are more countries in this world than the USA.


Jesus did this thread get out of track :Hmmmm:

----------


## Phreak101

Why is it everytime some kind of thread involving a world problem comes up, somehow the bashing and/or defending of the U.S. comes up??

Is it because the U.S. wants its hands involved in everything, the U.S. MUST have it's hand in everything (ie world police, superpower responsibility, etc), or a combo of both?

----------


## Logan13

> So if I beat down a homeless bum you cant have a oppinion about it since you didnt participate 
> 
> Offcourse I can have oppinions about the stupid moves the world powers make.  
> They are not immune to critique, it just happen that right now its america that is doing the stupid moves. If this was during the cold war I would be just as critical about what moves the soviet union make or in 30 years Il probably be very critical to chinas actions.
> 
> Big powers do things to further there own interests and thats obvious, but if americas interests isnt in my interest or if america is trying to claim its interests is a nobel cause, then I will critique. There are more countries in this world than the USA.
> 
> 
> Jesus did this thread get out of track


Again, have all of the opinions you want. Sit back, form your opinions while we do our best to solve the big issues of the day. I see Sweden as the "Watchers", do nothing just watch and form opinions. I am entitled to my opinion that Sweden does not deserve an opinion on this as well Johan......
Now, If you wanted to post your thoughts on ABBA, you are entitled to that as well........ :Wink/Grin:

----------


## Kärnfysikern

> Again, have all of the opinions you want. Sit back, form your opinions while we do our best to solve the big issues of the day. I see Sweden as the "Watchers", do nothing just watch and form opinions. I am entitled to my opinion that Sweden does not deserve an opinion on this as well Johan......
> Now, If you wanted to post your thoughts on ABBA, you are entitled to that as well........


Well we define do nothing in completely different ways since you consider everything not involving alot of explosive as nothing  :Wink: 

Unfortunaly NO country is doing anything about the big issues of today, not america, not sweden, not france, not whateveristan. Everyone is just focusing on the inflated non issues.

----------


## Chad B

> More people are dying because of starvation, lack of clean water, and disease than by war. What are 3 million troops going to do? Unless their going to be used to pick up some ploughs and or bring medicine, their not going to much. So if your thinking of sending troops, first realize most deaths are not the result of bullets.


Of coarse they are not being killed by all bullets, they cost too much! These soldiers are raping, starving little girls and children. 

This we need to stop! Then bring in the irrigation, medicine and so on. But first, in order to get help to these people bring in the 3 million world troops to annihilate the child killers and warloards. 

Bringing in supplies would do know good it they are taken by the warlords, remember it is genocide going on, mass killing of women and children inflicted by the human powers that be. 

People are dieing all over the world due to natural causes like drought, disease. This genocide is different, mass torture in a confined area of the world inflicted by human power, must annihilate the sickow child rapist and murderers before there can be a sound society.

Get real.

----------


## mcpeepants

> Of coarse they are not being killed by all bullets, they cost too much! These soldiers are raping, starving little girls and children. 
> 
> This we need to stop! Then bring in the irrigation, medicine and so on. But first, in order to get help to these people bring in the 3 million world troops to annihilate the child killers and warloards. 
> 
> Bringing in supplies would do know good it they are taken by the warlords, remember it is genocide going on, mass killing of women and children inflicted by the human powers that be. 
> 
> People are dieing all over the world due to natural causes like drought, disease. This genocide is different, mass torture in a confined area of the world inflicted by human power, must annihilate the sickow child rapist and murderers before there can be a sound society.
> 
> Get real.


This is a regional (if your talking about Darfur) fighting whose root cause is ownership of land and water resources. You need to solve that problem to end the conflict. They are killing and raping to scare the other side it fleeing the land. Things like rape and terrorism are attention grabbing but you must put it in perspective when you compare it to the toll of preventable things like hunger and disease. Death is death whether by bullet or hunger. It's naive to think dumping 3 million troops, that's an invasion force not a peace keeping force, is going to solve the problem. Do you expect them to get rose pettles like the coalition troops got in Iraq.

----------


## Chad B

> This is a regional (if your talking about Darfur) fighting whose root cause is ownership of land and water resources. You need to solve that problem to end the conflict. They are killing and raping to scare the other side it fleeing the land. Things like rape and terrorism are attention grabbing but you must put it in perspective when you compare it to the toll of preventable things like hunger and disease. Death is death whether by bullet or hunger. It's naive to think dumping 3 million troops, that's an invasion force not a peace keeping force, is going to solve the problem. Do you expect them to get rose pettles like the coalition troops got in Iraq.


Yes Dafur

Here we go again we can reason with the child rapist and killers. Fix there problems  :0beatoff: 

Any governing power that goes raping and starving innocent children repeatedly needs to be destroyed. If you have any good whatsoever in you, you would chose to die rather than rape and kill innocent children. Period.

Get rid of the evil monsters, and then fix our fellow humans problems. This is the only way it would work. 

How are you so sure about Irack? I hear that most of the population is grateful that they have been liberated. I hear only a small amount is opposing and they are getting all the media/news coverage. I hear that real-estate and the economy is better now for the public than it ever has been. I also hear what you are saying too, but it seems to me like you only hear from the liberal democrat mouth, then make definite comments. I on the other hand say that I know not if Irack is going good or bad because I am not there, I hear bias reports, and I am not God. Only time will tell... 

I know one thing, many American soldiers are there with the greater good in there mind and heart, willing to sacrifice there lives which many have, there choice.

----------


## mcpeepants

What about the innocent Sudanese who will be killed when you send tons of bombs at them as you try to topple the government? Also, what if you do topple the government. You'll will leave a power vacuum and probably start a civil war with different ethnic groups trying to gain control. Sudan could become a anarchy state ruled by warlords like Somalia and Afghanistan. 

I look to many news sources and the Iraqi news doesn't look so good. The puppet government of Iraq only controls the greenzone. There is basically low level civil war going on between shia and sunnis and Iraqi is slowly disintegrating. Thousands of people dying a month. Religious fundmentalist gaining control. I'm a liberal but no democrat. The democrat bull doesn't work if you notice that almost all democratic congressman keep voting to fund the war. Go to cspan and see the votes on the war spending bill last week.

----------


## Phreak101

> What about the innocent Sudanese who will be killed when you send tons of bombs at them as you try to topple the government? Also, what if you do topple the government. You'll will leave a power vacuum and probably start a civil war with different ethnic groups trying to gain control. Sudan could become a anarchy state ruled by warlords like Somalia and Afghanistan. 
> 
> I look to many news sources and the Iraqi news doesn't look so good. The puppet government of Iraq only controls the greenzone. There is basically low level civil war going on between shia and sunnis and Iraqi is slowly disintegrating. Thousands of people dying a month. Religious fundmentalist gaining control. I'm a liberal but no democrat. The democrat bull doesn't work if you notice that almost all democratic congressman keep voting to fund the war. Go to cspan and see the votes on the war spending bill last week.


The Green Zone is the majority of Southern Iraq, and the U.S. Military has control over the Northwestern area of Iraq. The red zone is maybe 1/5th of Iraq. The situation is rather turbulent, but I don't think it's as bad as you're making it out to be...

What's Wolverine doing in your avatar, sticking his claws into his head?

----------


## Chad B

> What about the innocent Sudanese who will be killed when you send tons of bombs at them as you try to topple the government? Also, what if you do topple the government. You'll will leave a power vacuum and probably start a civil war with different ethnic groups trying to gain control. Sudan could become a anarchy state ruled by warlords like Somalia and Afghanistan. 
> 
> I look to many news sources and the Iraqi news doesn't look so good. The puppet government of Iraq only controls the greenzone. There is basically low level civil war going on between shia and sunnis and Iraqi is slowly disintegrating. Thousands of people dying a month. Religious fundmentalist gaining control. I'm a liberal but no democrat. The democrat bull doesn't work if you notice that almost all democratic congressman keep voting to fund the war. Go to cspan and see the votes on the war spending bill last week.


Dont you mean funding operation Iraqi freedom.

----------


## mcpeepants

> The Green Zone is the majority of Southern Iraq, and the U.S. Military has control over the Northwestern area of Iraq. The red zone is maybe 1/5th of Iraq. The situation is rather turbulent, but I don't think it's as bad as you're making it out to be...
> 
> What's Wolverine doing in your avatar, sticking his claws into his head?


Spiderman and Wolverine got in a argument and Spiderman ended up webbing him up. He was stuck like that for a hour or so because he could pop his claws out. 

The green zone is in Iraq and where the so called Iraqi government controls the country. The northern part of hasn't been much of problem. But when kurds, sunnis, and shias start to claim rights to the oil in the north, trouble will be brewing. Most of the violence is in the center of Iraq, particular in Baghdad. That makes sense, if the goverment can't control the capitol, what can they do. The Iraq health ministry released states of deaths for july and augusts and they number was something like a 100 people being killed a day. That's not including bodies that were found and it might of missed a couple of violent areas.

----------


## mcpeepants

> Dont you mean funding operation Iraqi freedom.


You can call occupation whatever you like

----------


## Chad B

> Yeah, the UN needs to be give aid directly to the people. Don't give aid to corrupt governments and expect it to trickle down to the people.


Just thought I would let you know that the Sudanese government said that they will let no UN peace keepers in the region, they will be met with resistance. 

So what now mister smarty?

----------


## Logan13

> Just thought I would let you know that the Sudanese government said that they will let no UN peace keepers in the region, they will be met with resistance. 
> 
> So what now mister smarty?


peepants answer would be "we must talk with the Sudanese" This is the same guy that just posted how the UN should give aid instead of giving it to corrupt gov'ts......he must have forgotten about the whole "Oil for food" scandel perpetrated by many members of the UN..... i.e. the Biggest scandel in world history!

----------


## mcpeepants

> Just thought I would let you know that the Sudanese government said that they will let no UN peace keepers in the region, they will be met with resistance. 
> 
> So what now mister smarty?


Of course they don't want UN peace Keepers, they saw how there were Nato peace keepers in Yugoslavia and how it help lead to the break up of that country. So Sudan needs to think what are your real motives for peace keepers and since you've said all governments are bad (to differing degrees), how do you know they really have the Sudanese peoples interest at heart. There are AU troops there, you can fund them and have them deliver the aid.

----------


## Chad B

> Of course they don't want UN peace Keepers, they saw how there were Nato peace keepers in Yugoslavia and how it help lead to the break up of that country. So Sudan needs to think what are your real motives for peace keepers and since you've said all governments are bad (to differing degrees), how do you know they really have the Sudanese peoples interest at heart. There are AU troops there, you can fund them and have them deliver the aid.


*What the FUK is aid going to do in genocide? 

Let the women and children have full stomachs and medication before they are raped and slaughtered by the hundreds of thousands?

When you see bulldozers pushing tens of thousands of bodies consting of women, children, and babys into massive holes in the ground this is what you thinkgive them FUKing aid?*   :Icon Pissedoff:

----------


## mcpeepants

> peepants answer would be "we must talk with the Sudanese" This is the same guy that just posted how the UN should give aid instead of giving it to corrupt gov'ts......he must have forgotten about the whole "Oil for food" scandel perpetrated by many members of the UN..... i.e. the Biggest scandel in world history!


It's seems your critical of greedy people get rich off the Oil for food program than the thousands of Iraqi citzens who suffered and died because of it. It also strengthened Saddam by more people dependent on him for food. 

This is what Former secretary of state Madeleine Albright said about the sanctions on 60 minutes:

LESLEY STAHL: "...We have heard that a half a million children have died. I mean that's more children than died when-wh-in- in Hiroshima. And- and, you know, is the price worth it?" 

MADELEINE ALBRIGHT: "I think this is a very hard choice, but the price--we think the price is worth it... It is a moral question. but the moral question is even a larger one. Don't we owe to the American people and to the American military and to the other countries in the region that this man not be a threat?" 

STAHL: "Even with the starvation and the lack..." 

ALBRIGHT: "I think, Lesley--it is hard for me to say this because I am a humane person, but my first responsibility is to make sure that United States forces do not have to go and refight the Gulf War."

----------


## mcpeepants

> *What the **** is aid going to do in genocide? 
> 
> Let the women and children have full stomachs and medication before they are raped and slaughtered by the hundreds of thousands?
> 
> When you see bulldozers pushing tens of thousands of bodies consting of women, children, and babys into massive holes in the ground this is what you thinkgive them ****ing aid?*


Well it will prevent majority of the death which are occuring at refugee camps due to starvation, thirst, and disease. It would prevent people risking leaving refugee camps to get water, food, fire wood etc. Fully funding the AU troops so they can continue protecting civillians.

----------


## Chad B

> Well it will prevent majority of the death which are occuring at refugee camps due to starvation, thirst, and disease. It would prevent people risking leaving refugee camps to get water, food, fire wood etc. Fully funding the AU troops so they can continue protecting civillians.


WOW, you are impossible! This is genocide any refuge camps in the region will be all slaughtered. 

Do you know what genocide is? 

Again I ask you, when you see tens of thousands of bodies consisting of women, children, and babies being pushed by bulldozers into giant holes in the ground what do you think? Should we stop it? Should we fly over with fighter jets and blow up the soldiers? Remember this is nothing like Iraq, they are using weapons from WWI and sling shots, it would be like stepping on ants. I am talking about doing it strategically only hitting there army.

----------


## Chad B

> Well it will prevent majority of the death which are occuring at refugee camps due to starvation, thirst, and disease. It would prevent people risking leaving refugee camps to get water, food, fire wood etc. Fully funding the AU troops so they can continue protecting civillians.


Are you going to answer my question or are you to prideful to change your view in front of us. 

What about the thousands of women and children that are not in refuge camps. Should we let tens of thousands of bodies consisting of women, children, and babies pushed by bulldozers into giant holes in the ground, should we stop this or do you think we should not interfere? 

Please answer yes we should stop it or no. Remember they just said they will not allow ANY aid and any interference will be meet with strong opposition. So is it yes or no?

----------


## Chad B

> peepants answer would be "we must talk with the Sudanese" This is the same guy that just posted how the UN should give aid instead of giving it to corrupt gov'ts......he must have forgotten about the whole "Oil for food" scandel perpetrated by many members of the UN..... i.e. the Biggest scandel in world history!


It is a real shame, if we only would have talked with Hitler a little more we could have stopped WWII and saved all those people. You know, gave him some good counseling.
 :Icon Rolleyes:

----------


## Chad B

Just seen on TV a 3 year old girl was gang raped by the soldiers. There is no fighting back these are just villagers who just want to go to the creek and get water without getting raped, we could walk faster than they could probably run. Terrible  :Cry:

----------


## Logan13

> It is a real shame, if we only would have talked with Hitler a little more we could have stopped WWII and saved all those people. You know, gave him some good counseling.


exactly, if only we had gotten Hitler to lay down on the couch and talk about his mother, maybe than this whole WW2 thing could have been avoided. Peepants, Never-neverland must be beautiful this time of year........ :Roll Eyes (Sarcastic):

----------


## mcpeepants

> WOW, you are impossible! This is genocide any refuge camps in the region will be all slaughtered. 
> 
> Do you know what genocide is? 
> 
> Again I ask you, when you see tens of thousands of bodies consisting of women, children, and babies being pushed by bulldozers into giant holes in the ground what do you think? Should we stop it? Should we fly over with fighter jets and blow up the soldiers? Remember this is nothing like Iraq, they are using weapons from WWI and sling shots, it would be like stepping on ants. I am talking about doing it strategically only hitting there army.


I don't know if it's a war. But it is regionally fighting that is occuring on both sides and civillians getting killed and raped. There are no soldiers there just miltia men back by the Sudanese government and rebels (this are the ones we're backing) fighting those miltia men and the goverment. How are the jets going to differenting between the groups let alone civillians when there dropping bombs. Hitting strategically is never as strategic as we think. All the while, people will be starving to death and dying from disease while they watching the bombs fly.

----------


## mcpeepants

> Are you going to answer my question or are you to prideful to change your view in front of us. 
> 
> What about the thousands of women and children that are not in refuge camps. Should we let tens of thousands of bodies consisting of women, children, and babies pushed by bulldozers into giant holes in the ground, should we stop this or do you think we should not interfere? 
> 
> Please answer yes we should stop it or no. Remember they just said they will not allow ANY aid and any interference will be meet with strong opposition. So is it yes or no?


We can stop it by funding AU troops so they can guard the refugee camps and villages and protect aid convoys. This would provents the thousands of thousands of deaths that are occuring in those camps due to starvation and disease. Now answer my questions instead of dodging:

1. You said all governments are evil to varying degree. So why do you think these goverments have the best interest of the Sudanese civillians at heart?

2. How is bombing going to solve the root cause of land resource?

3. How are you going to differentiate between miltia men, rebel, and civillian when your bombing?

4. How are you going get the 3 million troops?

5. Will the troops overthrow the goverment?

6. How will you solve the disablizing affects on neighboring countries do to bombing Sudan?

7. What about the muslim world's reaction to bombing Sudan?

8. Do you realize that Darfur is about the size of France?

----------


## mcpeepants

> exactly, if only we had gotten Hitler to slay down on the couch and talk about his mother, maybe than this whole WW2 thing could have been avoided. Peepants, Never-neverland must be beautiful this time of year........


Always bringing up Hitler. We didn't start fighting Hitler because he was slaughtering jews in concentration camps. The the only reason we got into that the war (with troops) was because Hitler's ally Japan bombed us. If Japan hadn't attacked us, we might not have gotten into that war.

----------


## Logan13

> Always bringing up Hitler. We didn't start fighting Hitler because he was slaughtering jews in concentration camps. The the only reason we got into that the war (with troops) was because Hitler's ally Japan bombed us. If Japan hadn't attacked us, we might not have gotten into that war.


Sure, we would have just let England and France become a part of nazi Germany.

----------


## mcpeepants

> Sure, we would have just let England and France become a part of nazi Germany.


France was already under Nazi rule. Without being attacked by Japan, I don't know how FDR would have gotten the American people to fight another war. We would of helped France and Britain the best way we could but going to war, I'm not sure after the results of war war one.

----------


## Logan13

> France was already under Nazi rule. Without being attacked by Japan, I don't know how FDR would have gotten the American people to fight another war. We would of helped France and Britain the best way we could but going to war, I'm not sure after the results of war war one.


Don't forget that we had Nazi subs on the outscirts of Manhatten _Before_ the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor. They knew that it was in our best interests to not allow the Nazi's to rule such a large land mass. But unlike those in the Middle East, if Nazi's would have taken over Europe, the Europeans would have fought back.........

----------


## mcpeepants

> Don't forget that we had Nazi subs on the outscirts of Manhatten _Before_ the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor. They knew that it was in our best interests to not allow the Nazi's to rule such a large land mass. But unlike those in the Middle East, if Nazi's would have taken over Europe, the Europeans would have fought back.........


I'm not sure what you mean by the middle east comment. But the only way for the FDR to mobilize the country into war was only if it was attacked. There were plenty of isolationist who didn't want to get involved in another european war. when japan attacked, it made it our war.

----------


## Chad B

> I don't know if it's a war. But it is regionally fighting that is occuring on both sides and civillians getting killed and raped. There are no soldiers there just miltia men back by the Sudanese government and rebels (this are the ones we're backing) fighting those miltia men and the goverment. How are the jets going to differenting between the groups let alone civillians when there dropping bombs. Hitting strategically is never as strategic as we think. All the while, people will be starving to death and dying from disease while they watching the bombs fly.


What are you talking about? There is no war it is genocide. There are the guys with guns mass slaughtering poor village people. No fighting between sides, just one side slaughtering peaceful villagers. 

They said ALL interference will be meet with strong opposition, this includes the AU.

So, I guess no matter what is going on, no matter how may little girls are getting gang raped each day, you would never send in fighting troops?

----------


## Chad B

> Always bringing up Hitler. We didn't start fighting Hitler because he was slaughtering jews in concentration camps. The the only reason we got into that the war (with troops) was because Hitler's ally Japan bombed us. If Japan hadn't attacked us, we might not have gotten into that war.


You missed the whole point, let me say it another way:

If we would have only talked with Jeffery Dahmer he would have never been a serial murder, we could have saved all those lives. 

Get it? You cant talk with sick basterds.

----------


## Chad B

*bold...*




> We can stop it by funding AU troops so they can guard the refugee camps and villages and protect aid convoys. *NO, AU TROOPS WILL BE MEET WITH STRONG OPPOSITION. So all the people outside the camps should die? all people in the camps and villages will be slaguhtered, unless the world interfears with force, once again it is genocide* This would provents the thousands of thousands of deaths that are occuring in those camps due to starvation and disease.*NOT true, They will eventually be slaughtered if they are in the region*  Now answer my questions instead of dodging:*just like you dodged mine*
> 
> 1. You said all governments are evil to varying degree. So why do you think these goverments have the best interest of the Sudanese civillians at heart? *they dont that is what I am complaining about. If they did there would already be military forces there stopping the genocide.*
> 
> 2. How is bombing going to solve the root cause of land resource? *
> We can deal with that after we stop the 4 year old girls from getting gang raped. Yes bring in education, irrigationafter we get rid of the monsters
> *
> 
> 3. How are you going to differentiate between miltia men, rebel, and civillian when your bombing? *Easy, march 3 million troops and they will give up with no shots fired. Do you know what 3 million troops would look like?*
> ...



*My whole point of this thing is that the world doesnt care, they just want to talk, and the genocide goes on. 3 million troops marching would stop it with minimal causalities maybe none, they would all surrender. Then bring in the aid and so fourth. Bring in the irrigation and education to all in Africa and around the world. But NO we are in Iraq because there is oil there. What a fukt up world, full of hypocrites. 

We did the same with the Indians  
*

----------


## mcpeepants

> What are you talking about? There is no war it is genocide. There are the guys with guns mass slaughtering poor village people. No fighting between sides, just one side slaughtering peaceful villagers. 
> 
> They said ALL interference will be meet with strong opposition, this includes the AU.
> 
> So, I guess no matter what is going on, no matter how may little girls are getting gang raped each day, you would never send in fighting troops?


The Sudanese government is using Janjaweed miltia men to fight rebels in Darfur. The Janjaweed are also killing and raping Fur and another ethnic groups that they have long had beef with.

----------


## mcpeepants

> You missed the whole point, let me say it another way:
> 
> If we would have only talked with Jeffery Dahmer he would have never been a serial murder, we could have saved all those lives. 
> 
> Get it? You cant talk with sick basterds.



But are you going to bomb Wisconsin to get him.

----------


## mcpeepants

> *bold...*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *My whole point of this thing is that the world doesnt care, they just want to talk, and the genocide goes on. 3 million troops marching would stop it with minimal causalities maybe none, they would all surrender. Then bring in the aid and so fourth. Bring in the irrigation and education to all in Africa and around the world. But NO we are in Iraq because there is oil there. What a fukt up world, full of hypocrites. 
> 
> We did the same with the Indians  
> *


I think we agree that world governments don't care. We just disagree on motives of solving the problem.

----------

