Jump to content

Theme© by Fisana
 

Photo

What would it take for Russia to be #1?


  • Please log in to reply
7545 replies to this topic

#3461 woj1@cyberonic.

woj1@cyberonic.

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 10667 posts

Posted 31 July 2004 - 03:14 AM

One of favorite Donq subjects are Scandinavians coops.
This Vikings blood adventure started in 8 century.
They attacked England and France where they granted duchy of Normandy, lost in Irland but the Danish conquest of England was meaningful.
Knut the Great ruled England, Denmark and Norway. Norman member of those Vikings, or Norsemen, who settled in northern France together with their descendants. The Normans founded the duchy of Normandy and sent out expeditions of conquest and colonization to southern Italy and Sicily and to England, Wales, Scotland, and Ireland.
The military conquest of England was done by William, duke of Normandy, primarily effected by his decisive victory at the Battle of Hastings (Oct. 14, 1066. Edward the Confessor, last king of the Old English royal line, had almost certainly in 1051 designated William as his successor.
  • 0

#3462 Bader

Bader

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1757 posts

Posted 31 July 2004 - 08:51 AM

would oppose coop wells/waterholes.

You are right DonQ,
but the best way is to stop feeding the lion and feed oneself as much as possible- the coop being the best medium and competition for voting with ones feet.
The conflict strategy is the lions and made famous by that "'shity little country...." excuse my french...
because it empower a superceding situation planned for.
Where did Hegel get that? Observation of being an insider?
Enjoyed Jibjab.

Ukraine: good news Woj and that Russia patted them on the back.

Hose Marti: dead right. Woj is one of those who wants freedom for all, except the Slavs. For the Slavs he wants communism. Maybe George Sorrows will help him achieve it.

Kerry, Kerry quite contrary, how does your garden grow? Silverbells and cockleshells and all pretty little lies all in a row.
See, I told you he was selected ( a wet paperbag) to make Bush look normal and sound.

Woj: The end of British kings was the beginning of the end of English culture that took place over a few centuries. (happening much faster to the US today) A certain people who were kicked out, as in many countries, returned behind the Orange man, no doubt the power of money which buys influence and key positions
over time. British unite. ( and kick out Blair)
  • 0

#3463 donquijote

donquijote

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3919 posts

Posted 31 July 2004 - 07:39 PM

<would oppose coop wells/waterholes.>

Howdy Bader
I have bumped into hundreds of small time bureaucrats--who feed off the lion's scraps--and a few predators, and I can count with my fingers the ones willing to consider a change for the better. The little people though think is a great idea. There's indeed a class struggle, but the solution is NOT to pit one against the other, but rather space for each other. Live and let live.;)

<You are right DonQ,
but the best way is to stop feeding the lion and feed oneself as much as possible- the coop being the best medium and competition for voting with ones feet.>

There are many that propose the same thing but Rene Dumont, a famous French agronomist, was the main proponent of it. I got some wonderful article in Spanish of how he advised Castro in the early stages of the revolution to do just that, but of course was ignored, only to be accused later of being a CIA agent.:confused: Today Cuba is a land of scarcity and repression.

<Hose Marti: dead right. Woj is one of those who wants freedom for all, except the Slavs. For the Slavs he wants communism. Maybe George Sorrows will help him achieve it.>

That would be funny. But you have to take into account that "democracy" has become a dirty word...

<British unite. >

Hey Bader, Woj is going to think that we are preparing the British to attack the Slavs...;)
  • 0

#3464 donquijote

donquijote

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3919 posts

Posted 31 July 2004 - 07:56 PM

Hey Bader, I've being looking for something about Rene Dumont and I finally found it. What it says about Africa can be applicable elsewhere the lion is to be challenged. The loan is only a hook. The small water well is better than the big water well.;)

"Rene Dumont, in his latest book, Stranglehold on Africa: argues that greater self-reliance is the way out of the poverty trap, both regionally and nationally. -It would be helpful for the countries of Africa to cut back on their trade with the capitalist countries, so as to give them fewer opportunities for exploitation. . . this also applies to the villages since they are exploited twice over - by the outside world and by their country-s rulers-.

Dumont favours loosening the ties with the -Foreign Exchange Machine- that dominates Africa-s economy. But this will take a tremendous act of political will which is unlikely to come solely from above. African governments - even ones who want change - are too enmeshed in the structures and schemes of neo-colonialism. Without an impulse from below to provide a counterweight to the external forces that shape Africa, a way out of the poverty trap seems unlikely. The poor must act for themselves. Only a peasant movement has the potential to fit politics to the real needs of Africa. avoiding the pitfalls of prestige projects and national pomp. The maize field rather than the coffee plantation. The water pump instead of the hydro dam."

http://www.newint.or...139/keynote.htm
  • 0

#3465 donquijote

donquijote

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3919 posts

Posted 31 July 2004 - 11:33 PM

Sometimes is not only a lion, but a dinosaur that we keep feeding until it devours us all...:confused;

The question is, "What do we need a dinosaur for?";)

> > But they had plenty of tax revenue to subsidize automobile cars.
>
> Most common troll comment in these groups. There should be an attempt
> to start a FAQ for this one myth considering how often it reappears.
>
> 1. Military
>
> The US military international presence (usually) helps ensure a stable
> world where commerce and rights are (generally) protected. A stable
> world allows things like oil to sell closer to their market driven
> prices, NOT at a subsidized price. Conversely an unstable
> international scene causes things like oil to sell for wildly unstable
> (plus/minus) prices. To that extent, the international US engagement,
> both political and economic, removes price distortions and allows
> prices to more accurately track market forces. Pretty much the
> opposite of the ICTA claims.
>
> Your problem is that you tie the fact of US involvement with the
> speculative conclusion that it must follow that the engagement is in
> itself somehow a subsidy.

A troll comment? It looks to me like before you launch the military, you look for ways to diversify transportation so in effect you SAVE oil. I mean, that looks to me like the common sense approach not the gung ho military approach.

Source: World Press Review, letters)

Yes, we need to fight a war, but no, the enemy is not Iraq... The
enemy is oil with 65+ percent of the known oil reserves in the
politically unstable, "Death to America"-chanting Middel East. Imagine
the advances the United States could make to world stability and
developing domestic employment opportunities if it spent the $79+
billion Congress recently approved for Bush's Iraq war on alternative
energy subsidies and investment. Might this be a better way to fight
terrorism, support our troops, and regain world favor?

Jay Lustgarten
San Anselmo, California

>
> 2. Lost Property Taxes
>
> Didn't you see the
> "PRIVATE PROPERTY NO TRESSPASSING" signs? Seems to me that those
> drivers already paid for the road right of ways, now you want to tax
> them for the infrastructure they prepaid for with gas taxes.
>
> Regardless, you've seen the property tax impacts for adjacent
> properties so you already knew that highyways increase local property
> tax revenues but that wasn't convienient for your flipant comment.
>
> While we are at it, yes vehicle owners do indeed frequently pay a
> property tax on their autos which are part of the highway mode of
> transportation.

Keep your roads. We need more transportation options. Go and check Curitiba, Brazil, which got one the best system in the world.

A SOLUTION (Curitiba, Brazil)

The urban transportation system is one of Curitiba's best-known planning
successes, a model for cities around world that want to implement
eco-efficient transportation networks that are well-integrated with
urban form and produce environmental benefits.

The city pioneered the idea of an all-bus transit network with special
bus-only avenues created along well-defined structural axes that were
also used to channel the city's growth. The transit system is rapid and
cheap, and is currently being integrated with the metropolitan region.

Its efficiency encourages people to leave their cars at home. Curitiba
has one of highest rates of car ownership in Brazil, and high population
growth. Yet auto traffic has dropped substantially; Curitiba has the
highest public ridership of any Brazilian city (about 2.14 million
passengers a day), and it registers the country's lowest rates of
ambient pollution and per capita gas consumption. In addition, an
inexpensive "social fare" promotes equality, benefiting poorer residents
settled on the city's periphery. A standard fare is charged for all
trips, meaning shorter rides subsidize longer ones. One fare can take a
passenger 70 kilometers.

>
> 3. suggestions for more?

Nope. Suggestions for b-e-t-t-e-r. ;)

***

'Of course, there are reasons why the American government no longer
helps us make war-related connections, mostly having to do with where
those connections might lead us politically. There's a World War
II-era government poster that reads "Should brave men die so you can
drive?"
  • 0

#3466 Bader

Bader

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1757 posts

Posted 01 August 2004 - 02:06 AM

Yes and no.
The label may or may not have anymeaning, like Iraq it has been abused to represent money power, so that it can mean different things to different people, but the original meaning still stands
to mock the sycophantic political prostitutes.

Most bureacrats in your observation dont want any change, same as academics, media puppeets and the politcal prostitutes-because they are doing ok, rewarded to keep the system going.
Same reason Africa cant change. The few who stand up for
social justice are often avoided like the plague.
Rene Dumont is a good exception to the rule, see if Castro hadnt of been Marxist he might have been influenced by Dumont. But the are opposites, Marx was about power not liberation, and not power for the people, Dupont was for liberation/social justice.
One is will-to-power and the other will-to-freedom. Marx is the equivalent to medieval religion.- cororate capture, people are created to serve the system, Dupont the reverse- devise systems
to serve the people, start local and extend to a larger regional
scale and then national, using the same principles, the even
inter-national.
The lion has to lock it all up so there is no vacuum, no space for
competition, so does higher education really differ around the world? To produce the bureaucrats that run the govts for the lion?

Iraq will be just like Africa. Can one seperate "colonial" influences from "Corporate"? The East India Co is a classic example of the Bush cabal and the Carlisle Group, Haliburtons,
Browns etc etc. Colonial is misleading in my view, its part of north v south, the Hegel strategy, as though there are not millions in the west on and below the poverty line. It comes back to money power whether oil, arms, pharmasutical, banksters,
Rev. Moon whatever. Nationality/race etc are all the same when it comes to ****ing up to the money, its an individual divide.

American military presence- to stablise prices, like what, the price
of armaments. There was no oil issue regards Iraq. The Green Berets fired the oil wells in the first war. They claimed Hussein was trying to interfer with the oil market by taking Kuwaits oil, yet the US ambassador told Hussein they had no interest in him taking Kuwait a disputed territory the British/BP seperated, no doubt to destablise arab nationalism. It is now recognised by many that the second Bush war has greatly stoked up the fire for terrorism which can have huge impacts on world prices.

Britain has already attacked Slavs in Serbia, for harbouring a known criminal Milosovic and it looks like the Ukraine will be found guilty of the same soon, but it might be a little harder to bomb them into submission to the NWO. Nothing like price-stability in a monoploy game. You pay a price to be in and pay a price if you try to stay out. All prices must be stablised.

Should we call a monoploy a dynasaur ?
  • 0

#3467 woj1@cyberonic.

woj1@cyberonic.

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 10667 posts

Posted 01 August 2004 - 02:54 AM

Freedom in coops; let us to continue talk about Donq favorite coops in Scandinavia.
Vikings old name for Danish, Swedish and Norwegian were very miserable creatures in the past. They lived on area similar or worser than North Siberia what was favorite place for Russians tsar for the prisoners.
Please imagine these countries for 9 month covered with snow and ice, three hrs day light in winter ; at the time when was no electricity, oil etc. Their the biggest dream was to left Scandinavia.
The most lucky were Danish who managed to escape to France and England.
During colonial time Denmark also had African colony from that time was quite good movie Out of Africa with Robert Redford . Action of that movie takes a place where Denmark was losing colony on behalf of Germany. Germany also block Denmark from Schleswig-Holstein .
Denmark Copenhagen was also attack by by English Nelson , fleet was destroyed and 6000thousand peoples.killed.
But today Denmark still has territories ;
Faeroe Islands
Group of islands in the Atlantic Ocean that form a self-governing region of Denmark.
Area: 540 sq mi (1,399 sq km). Population: (2002 est.) 47,400. Lying north of the British Isles, the islands are politically situated within the kingdom of Denmark. There are 17 inhabited islands and many islets and reefs. The largest, Str?m?, holds the capital of T?rshavn. The islands are high and rugged, with coasts that are deeply indented with fjords. The economy is based on fishing and sheep raising. First settled by Irish monks (c. 700), the islands were colonized by the Vikings (c. 800) and were ruled by Norway from the 11th century until 1380, when they passed to Denmark. They unsuccessfully sought independence in 1946 but received self-government in 1948. In the early 21st century they continued discussions with Denmark on full independence.

and Greenland ; Island country, northeastern North America.
The world's largest island (excluding Australia)
.http://www.britannica.com/ebc/article?eu=391413&query=denmark%20terrytories.&ct=

Swedish coops were less successful.
Swedish moved to destructing for both sides war with Poland and that time lost St Pitersburg territory for Russia.
After that fought with Finland and Norway and is still hated each other.
Since Nobel discovered dynamite, Sweden famous for neutrality sells everybody arms, cars and airplanes. Sweden is rich in the best quality steel.

The poorest country was Norway. Parents sold their boys for work on fishing bout to survive.
For act of stealing these nice Norwegian people cut the thief the hand.
Since discovery of oil this country is doing fine.

Scandinavia coops or rather sad, cold and dark countries where really nobody likes to live there. :)
  • 0

#3468 woj1@cyberonic.

woj1@cyberonic.

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 10667 posts

Posted 01 August 2004 - 03:01 AM

Donq;@Hey Bader, Woj is going to think that we are preparing the British to attack the Slavs... @

It would be nothing new under Sun. ....

Britain attacked Russia as a part of participant of
contrrevolution and during
Crimean War ( Encyclop?dia Britannica Article)

October 1853
  • 0

#3469 Bader

Bader

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1757 posts

Posted 01 August 2004 - 05:14 AM

Smart Pole to use British information.
Angles and Jutes all came to England from Denmark. The progressives stayed, the rejects went back home, they preferred to be unemplyed nine months of the year in bed.
The wonberlust of the British came from the Vikings thats why they took civilization to all the world, while Poles slept at the crossroads of Russia/Sweden/Austria/Prussia.
The Celts left evidence of settlements on the Atlantic coast of
America which shows it does belong to the British.
I expect the Asians walked across the ice, through Alaska to trade
with them, no doubt the Encyclopedia Britanica was the big
attraction, especially in those northern regions where darkness is
at least six months long and no tv.
Danes Unite and join Britain, instead of the UE!
  • 0

#3470 woj1@cyberonic.

woj1@cyberonic.

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 10667 posts

Posted 01 August 2004 - 12:08 PM

Bader; @Danes Unite and join Britain, instead of the UE!@

.....Well, now we know that no matter who wins in November, we
  • 0

#3471 woj1@cyberonic.

woj1@cyberonic.

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 10667 posts

Posted 01 August 2004 - 02:10 PM

Donq@ water pump instead of the hydro dam@
It is easy recognizing it as a voice of West. In colonial past English didn
  • 0

#3472 donquijote

donquijote

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3919 posts

Posted 01 August 2004 - 03:40 PM

<Most bureacrats in your observation dont want any change, same as academics, media puppeets and the politcal prostitutes-because they are doing ok, rewarded to keep the system going.
Same reason Africa cant change. The few who stand up for
social justice are often avoided like the plague.
Rene Dumont is a good exception to the rule, see if Castro hadnt of been Marxist he might have been influenced by Dumont. But the are opposites, Marx was about power not liberation, and not power for the people, Dupont was for liberation/social justice.
One is will-to-power and the other will-to-freedom. Marx is the equivalent to medieval religion.- cororate capture, people are created to serve the system, Dupont the reverse- devise systems
to serve the people, start local and extend to a larger regional
scale and then national, using the same principles, the even
inter-national.>

Howdy Bader
Mega-lions produce mega-projects. The whole country goes into a frenzy to build the super-well--and they end up as thirsty as before. But they forget their problems for a while and then embark on the next mega-project. In Cuba in 1970 EVERYTHING went into producing 10 million tons of sugar--and it wasn't accomplished...:confused:

The people suffered scarcity, many people were forced to be part of it (intellectuals, doctors, dissidents...) but the great campaign went on. Later the bureaucrats were blamed for it, but never shaken off. The lion and the bureaucrats, dangerous species...:(

PS: What animal would the bureaucrats be, the chameleon?:D

Bader, this article is really enlightening...;)

ECONOMIC MISMANAGEMENT

In addition to producing a privileged stratum of bureaucrats, these
developments created severe economic dislocations in Cuba and led to
demoralization and cynicism among Cuban workers and peasants. After
the failure of the Cuban sugar crop in 1970, Castro delivered a
series of speeches that acknowledged these problems and criticized
the bureaucracy. He cited the danger of state officials converting
"bureaucratic posts into comfortable, stagnant or privileged positions."

But Castro was to make an even more damning indictment against
bureaucratic control of the industries, conceding that the bureaucracy,
as a political apparatus grafted onto industry, resulted in inefficiencies
in production that were compounded by periodic miscalculations by party
functionaries that resulted in shortages of goods and production
bottlenecks.

In a revealing editorial, Cuba's Granma Weekly Review also noted that,
"One of the greatest damages produced by bureaucracy is in its
repercussion on the workers-not only production workers, but also many
administrative employees, victims themselves of the bureaucratic system.
As for workers and farmers, bureaucracy hits them by affecting production
and frequently affecting distribution of consumer articles or the
provision of services needed by the worker and his family."

"What could be worse," Granma asked, "than for a worker or farmer to see
problems that he understands and knows how to solve-in many cases simple
matters-remain unsolved or badly handled because of bureaucratic
functionaries and procedures?"

The solution for such problems of bureaucracy is workers' self-management
of the industries. For the rank and file not only have the working
knowledge to run the industries but also have a self-interest in seeing
that the economy runs smoothly.

CASTRO'S REJECTION OF WORKERS' CONTROL

The concept of workers' control of the industries was certainly not
unknown to Castro. In a 1970 report on the Cuban economy, he asked: "Why
should a manager have to be absolutely in charge? Why shouldn't we begin
to introduce representatives of the factory's workers into its management?
Why not have confidence? Why not put our trust in that tremendous
proletarian spirit of men who, at times in torn shoes and clothes,
nevertheless keep up production?"

However, if Castro asked pertinent questions, he also failed to even try
to answer them, except to infer at other times that such worker control
would impair the efficiency of production--a prime concern to the Cuban
leader. After asking the above questions, for example, Castro stated, "And
we'll have to work seriously on the problem of industrial efficiency,
based mainly on labor productivity."

In 1970, Castro launched a campaign to institutionalize the revolution,
reorganize the government and delineate the responsibilities of the
various state organs, the PCC and the military. During this new stage,
Castro proposed a decentralization of the government, a new Constitution
modeled after the 1936 Soviet Constitution and self-rule for workers.
According to Carmelo Mesa-Lago, one of the more notable academic writers
on Cuba, Castro "proposed several measures to decentralize the
administration, assign separate roles to key state agencies, allow the
workers to participate in enterprise management, democratize and
strengthen mass organizations, and establish channels for a more active
role of such organizations in national affairs."

POWER CENTRALIZED IN CASTROS

While administrative reforms were made, they failed to give the rank and
file greater participation in decision making and left the Castros even
more entrenched at the pinnacle of state power. Fidel Castro is President
of the Council of State and of the Council of Ministers, the "foremost
executive and administrative" body of the land. According to Mesa-Lago,
Fidel is also "first secretary of the PCC, commander-in-chief of the armed
forces, General of the Army.. and can assume at any time the leadership of
any central state administrative agency." Meanwhile Raul Castro is second
in command of the most powerful state organs.

"The only state organ which is not directly controlled by the two brothers
is the National Assembly," writes Mesa-Lago, "but it holds sessions only
twice a year and it is difficult to foresee the Assembly confronting or
curtailing the Castros' power." He adds that, "it is ironic that in his
speeches closing the first congress of the PCC and inaugurating the
National Assembly, Fidel strongly criticized the concentration of
political power in one person, family favoritism, and revolutionary
cliques, making China the target of his attacks."

While the state organs in Cuba are similar to those in the Soviet Union,
Mesa-Lago claims "there is an important difference between the two
politico-administrative systems: a more significant concentration of power
in the Cuban model."

PCC AND VANGUARDISM

As a Marxist-Leninist, Castro subscribes to the tenet that a vanguard is
necessary to make decisions on behalf of the working class. Though the PCC
was not formally established until 1966, the outlines of its ideological
structure were summed up in August 1963 by a Cuban journal that wrote:
"The party is the vanguard that guides the masses in the construction of
socialism. In order to perform its leading role, it is of no importance
whether it be so many more or less members, but only that it will be
capable of carrying out the directives from the National Directorate of
the Revolution, of applying these creatively to specific conditions, of
maintaining a close relationship with the working masses, and of leading
them onward."

The self-appointed task of the PCC is to "coordinate, educate, communicate
and control" the working class--in short, to see that workers implement
policy handed down from above. As an example of the function of the PCC,
Castro said in a speech delivered on March 13, 1968, that plant managers
were in charge of seeing that production quotas were met by the rank and
file, but that such administrators functioned under the watchful eye of
party members. Castro concluded that the party "must immediately call the
attention of the superior administrative body to any deficiency, any error
of an administrative nature, but the party should never tell the [plant]
manager what to do." Obviously, there is littie place in this setup for
rank-and-file participation.

NO CUBAN SOCIALISM

While the Cuban revolution did yield material benefits for many persons,
especially the poorest sectors of the working class and peasantry,
Castro's Marxism-Leninism failed to place Cuba on the road to building
socialism. Rather, it fostered new class divisions that are particularly
apparent in Castro's personal rule over Cuba. According to Mesa-Lago, Rene
Dumont, the French agronomist, noted on his visit to Cuba that "the lack
of confidence in the base, Castro's reluctance to delegate responsibility,
and the making of all important decisions at the top of the administrative
hierarchy had resulted in increasing personalism, paternalism, and
authoritarianism."

"Central controls," Mesa-Lago added, "had been imposed on the population,
the universities, and the press; and there was expanding militarization of
education, manpower, agriculture, the economy, and society in general."

http://groups.google...uth.net&rnum=27
  • 0

#3473 donquijote

donquijote

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3919 posts

Posted 01 August 2004 - 04:01 PM

<Violence is the first refuge of the incompetent. >

Howdy Woj
Nice article and nice quote, but why do you still love the lion?;)

I just posted something on the chamaleons, I mean the bureaucrats, and I tell you: Whatever the lion doesn't eat, they eat.:confused:

Communism is just that.

PS: It would be possible find a good bureaucrat, but that so far mostly happens in Scandinavia--perhaps because they don't have a lion...;)
  • 0

#3474 donquijote

donquijote

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3919 posts

Posted 01 August 2004 - 04:19 PM

<Should we call a monoploy a dynasaur ?>

The dinosaur would be the obsolete industry/technologies we keep feeding at the risk of environmental destruction and war. It would smarter to say, "Hey, let's introduce new technologies in order to save gas." But no, they must to the neighbor and grab more oil. A recipe for trouble, is it not?:confused:

The dinosaur inspires fear, so the world must keep feeding him...;)

PS: Hey Bader, I love the quote at the end...:cool:

> > > The Acela Express has 10 trains from Washington to Boston Monday
> > > through Friday. Capacity of an Acela Express train is 362
> > > passengers. I-95 runs all day, and 3620 passengers fit into a
> > > fairly small number of SUVs.
> >
> > Yes, probably about 3000 SUVs to carry those 3620 passengers. The vast
> > majority of Americans drive one to a car.
> >
> > > The train is also $178 round trip, per person.
>
> The comparison was with unrealistic with always fully loaded trains. As
> long as he uses train lies as examples, it is also then fair to use fully
> loaded SUVs lies as examples.

Well, if you have a problem with the train fare, there's a simple
solution: TAX GAS TO SUBSIDIZE TRAINS AND PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION. It
makes sense environmentally; it makes sense in comfort and safety; it
makes sense for our congested roads; it makes sense for security
reasons. Doesn't it? ;)

"It is true that you may fool all of the people some of the time; you
can even fool some of the people all of the time; but you can't fool
all of the people all of the time." -A. Lincoln
  • 0

#3475 donquijote

donquijote

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3919 posts

Posted 01 August 2004 - 04:50 PM

http://engforum.prav...?threadid=90139
  • 0

#3476 donquijote

donquijote

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3919 posts

Posted 01 August 2004 - 06:04 PM

<Besides, trains aren't an option for everyone. Not everyone in my small town works at the same place and the stores are all spread out. Roads and small vehicles are the only option.

Years ago, there were small neighborhood grocery stores that could easily be reached by walking. These have been replaced by large grocery retailers at the edge of town. Its too far to walk.>

Exactly, SPRAWL makes the care "necessary," which is why it has being promoted in America for the last 50 years.

However we can still have OPTIONS and let some people drive, and some ride the train, and some walk...

Have you thought that the more people have OTHER options, the less vehicles you have on the road? Unless, of course, you love to be stuck in traffic...:confused:

This article presents a unique and very competitive approach to tackle one of the bastions of socialism--or should I say communism?--in America: the "free ride" on the roads...;)

How to End Traffic Jams - and Grow Smartly

By Robert H. Nelson, Ph.D.

Most people think traffic jams are a fact of life. However, we could eliminate traffic congestion with the stroke of a pen. Traffic jams are the inevitable and foreseeable consequence of current government policy. If we changed the policy, the traffic congestion would disappear.

In the United States - with a few toll road exceptions - the use of highways is for free. Imagine what would happen if seats to Redskins games were offered for free. It would be like current traffic jams. Mobs of people would show up early, they would jostle for places in line, and only a fortunate few would get through the stadium gates and obtain seats. In effect, the "hassle" of getting into a Redskins game would substitute for the price that we now pay for seats.

Our present highway system works like that. It might be described as a last bastion of socialism in the United States. Under socialism, everyone is equal - equally poor. In northern Virginia, we are all equally stuck in traffic.

In the old Soviet Union, the price of apartments was very cheap, but you had to wait fifteen years to get one. The price of meat was subsidized, but it took hours of waiting in line to buy any. When communism finally died in the old Soviet Union, the one immediate change most noticeable in the daily life of the citizenry was the elimination of lines. Market prices, instead of waiting in line, became the rationing device for scarce goods and services.

In northern Virginia, we could do the same thing with traffic congestion - the long waits in traffic would disappear as rapidly as the food lines disappeared in the new Russia. All we have to do is to price the use of space on our highways at its market value.

In a market, when something is scarce, you pay more for it; that is elementary supply and demand. The available space on our highways is scarcest at peak hours. If you want to drive at 2:00 A.M., there should be no cost to anyone. If you want to drive at 8:00 A.M., many thousands of other people want to drive then as well, more people than the highways can accommodate. Instead of raising the price, however, we use the old socialist approach - everyone has to wait in line for an extra twenty minutes to one hour as traffic jams steadily increase during rush hour.

Proposals to eliminate traffic congestion through highway pricing at peak times are nothing new. Columbia University economist William Vickery won a Nobel Prize in economics in part for developing the economic details many years ago. What is new is low-cost technology to implement congestion pricing of highways. Satellite tracking systems now make it possible to follow the precise highway location of any vehicle by time of day. Trucking companies at present routinely monitor the locations of each vehicle in their fleet for management purposes. We could easily do the same for cars. It would be like a satellite based "Easy - Pass" system.

If you wanted to cross the Potomac River on the Wilson Bridge, use the Beltway, or drive on I-66 at 8:00 A.M., you would have to pay. It would be similar to a cell telephone system. You would pay depending on where you are, where you are going, and the time of day. A computer would keep track, and at the end of the month you would get a bill.

For highway users, they perhaps could see on a screen in their car what they were paying at any given moment. If they wanted to plan a future trip, they could inquire as to what alternative driving times and routes would cost. If the price was too high, they could choose a different route, travel at a different time, or join a car pool. Once the kinks were worked out, traffic jams would be eliminated. If traffic started to build regularly - say at the Wilson Bridge at 5:45 P.M. - the price would automatically increase. The price might have to be adjusted a few times, but we can be sure that the lines would eventually disappear.

Some people will object, no doubt, that highway pricing favors the rich. Because they can afford it, the well-off will be able to sail along the Beltway at the prime times without any delays. It is true that in any market system the rich are more likely to drive Mercedes Benzes and the poor used Chevrolets. That is how market capitalism works. However, we must realize that a highway pricing system will raise large revenues. These revenues could be used to improve the public schools for the urban poor, or perhaps reduce the sales tax (a regressive tax that disproportionately falls on the backs of the socioeconomically disadvantaged).

The "smart growth" movement is feeding off suburban discontent with traffic and other inconveniences of increasing numbers of people moving into new areas. This is a legitimate complaint. However, smart-growth proposals merely address the symptoms of the problem and, in fact, make things worse. Smart-growth proposals to increase densities actually jam more cars into less space.

The real cause of traffic congestion is the absence of any pricing system for the use of our highways. Real "smart growth" would address this problem directly. If we really want to be smart, we should abolish our socialistic system of free public use of highways and instead finally put market methods to work in this outmoded area of our economy.

http://www.virginiai...nt/2002_18.html
  • 0

#3477 Bader

Bader

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1757 posts

Posted 01 August 2004 - 08:16 PM

You cant hide it.
You would have liked the antiwar.com article Woj because of the left dialectic perspective, although they talk about the loonie left
themselves.
Money desides most of who votes in Congress regardless of which side of the same political coins leader -Demopublican or Repubicrat is chosen for President. Labels are merely part of the puppetshow. Like two boxers in the ring, the crowd chose a side or the no-conformist chides both, and there is one winner who is not in the ring.

Only the West?.....China, Pakastan and India, and what heppened the Sth Africas nuclear weapons, and there are bound to be others out there, given that Pakistan is reputedly been selling them. More labels and dialectic misrepresnetation- two guys in the ring- East and West, place your bets, dont look behind that curtain sir, pleae sit down with rest, theres a good felllow.

A dam a humanitarian project, so is the reforming of Iraq, the people are not part of the equation, its all about exploiting the
potentials, and the description of Cuba is as in China, Russia, Korea etc. Will-to-power. People are just items of technology
whipped on by rheteric about capitalism and the WEST, not entirely wrong accept the Communist party boses and family do the same, just axactly like a religious cult and the jewish gheto
dynamics, same idiology same funds began it all.

The workers could never have been given more power in Cuba because the natural outcome of that principle would have been it
had to flow right through to include the politics which meant the Castro family exactly like Husseins would have had to share power. Its only about power in few hands, the rest is propoganda. Even defining the jobs and responsibilities is the same as what happened with free-market reforms in the non-
communist countries with unions stripped of power and contract introduced, the state sector did the same in the guise of efficiencies which havent proved true, all we got was bureacratic madness, higher pay towards the top, reduction in staff to do so and the lower levels get poor pay. People can see the faults and everyone just carries on in their defined roles just as in communist
countries because to criterice meant no promotion to a decent pay.

Robert Nelson can stick his user-pays, the people own the roads
and the previous generation didnt make them for the state to
commodere for tax gathering. Notice again the market phrase to move in the direction of greater state power over public assets.

Woj Britain will remain its pound outside of the Euro only as long a s the dollars needs it to. ONce the dollar has reached its used-by date I expect the British will suddenly "want" to join the Euro
for selfish reasons but really for the Lion.
  • 0

#3478 donquijote

donquijote

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3919 posts

Posted 02 August 2004 - 12:48 AM

<Robert Nelson can stick his user-pays, the people own the roads
and the previous generation didnt make them for the state to
commodere for tax gathering. Notice again the market phrase to move in the direction of greater state power over public assets.>

Howdy Bader
I agree with everything but this proposal is thought-provoking. The guy proposes to help the poor not ignore them. And poor people are the most to suffer from the car dictatorship. They better have a car to survive in America.

Anyway, ROADS ARE HEAVILY SUBSIDIZED in favor of the automobile; other options are ignored. At least these tolls could go into those options.

The Real Price Of Gas

Executive Summary

This report by the International Center for Technology Assessment (CTA) identifies and quantifies the many external costs of using motor vehicles and the internal combustion engine that are not reflected in the retail price Americans pay for gasoline. These are costs that consumers pay indirectly by way of increased taxes, insurance costs, and retail prices in other sectors.

The report divides the external costs of gasoline usage into five primary areas: (1) Tax Subsidization of the Oil Industry; (2) Government Program Subsidies; (3) Protection Costs Involved in Oil Shipment and Motor Vehicle Services; (4) Environmental, Health, and Social Costs of Gasoline Usage; and (5) Other Important Externalities of Motor Vehicle Use. Together, these external costs total $558.7 billion to $1.69 trillion per year, which, when added to the retail price of gasoline, result in a per gallon price of $5.60 to $15.14.

http://www.icta.org/...ns/rlprexsm.htm
  • 0

#3479 donquijote

donquijote

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3919 posts

Posted 02 August 2004 - 02:11 AM

Hey Bader, these two fragments go to prove two facts we already know: The first is that "THE LION HATES COMPETITION," and the second is that "THE PUPPETS WON'T BETRAY THE PUPPETEER." They are two rules of the political jungle.

IT'S IMPORTANT TO KNOW THESE RULES BEFORE THE LION CONSOLIDATES INTO POWER.:cool:

I'll give you an example: In Venezuela--in a revolution some still have faith in--Chavez is consolidating itself as a small lion and creating a puppet relationship with Castro--all in an effort to resist the Big Lion. Are the little animals safe?:confused:

'In general, the bureaucracy of the totalitarian State is unsympathetic to the claims of self-management to autonomy. As Proudhon foresaw, it finds it hard to tolerate any authority external to itself. It dislikes socialization and longs for nationalization, that is to say, the direct management by officials of the State. Its object is to infringe upon self-management, reduce its powers, and in fact absorb it.

The single party is no less suspicious of self-management, and likewise finds it hard to tolerate a rival. If it embraces self-management, it does so to stifle it more effectively. The party has cells in most of the enterprises and is strongly tempted to take part in management, to duplicate the organs elected by the workers or reduce them to the role of docile instruments, by falsifying elections and setting out lists of candidates in advance. The party tries to induce the workers' councils to endorse decisions already taken in advance, and to manipulate and shape the national congresses of the workers.'

http://www.geocities...Conclusion.html

***

However, in this other fragment Dumont--for all his good intentions--doesn't see the lion at that early stage. And worst, he ignores the relationship between puppets and puppeteer...;)

Wanted: A Libertarian Caudillo
Dumont unwittingly endorses de facto paternalism on the part of Castro. For example:

... if Castro could rid himself of his mystics and utopians and surround himself with real representatives of the people, he [Castro the savior] COULD LEAD the Cuban People to prosperity ... (p. 122; our emphasis) ... [Since Castro] ... would not accept control from below because he enjoyed personal power too long to GIVE IT UP GRADUALLY ... it is therefore up to the country's political leaders, especially Raul Castro, Dorticos, Rafael Rodriguez, Armando Hart and Blas Roca, to advise Castro to do so IF THEY HAVE THE COURAGE AND IF THEY REALIZE THAT THE PRESENT PERSONAL DICTATORSHIP may lead to catastrophe ... (p. 140-141, Dumont's emphasis)

Since they have neither "the will nor the courage" to take Dumont's advice, the situation is hopeless. Is it at all likely that these hardened, cynical politicians who make up the "innermost ruling group," would, no more than Castro himself, "accept control from below," since they too "enjoyed power too long to give it up gradually"? Is it at all likely that this "communist bourgeoisie ... which clings to power by flattering Castro," whose very lives depend on Castro's good will, would summon up "the courage" to correct Castro? (p. 141)

That a realistic observer like Dumont could entertain the faintest hope that these puppets would willingly sacrifice themselves, is hard to understand.

http://dwardmac.pitz...n/chapter2.html
  • 0

#3480 donquijote

donquijote

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3919 posts

Posted 02 August 2004 - 03:35 AM

> > IOW, these Muslim fanatics are just like American car nuts. They need to
> > stop spewing hatred against everyone who does not want to live their lives
> > in a car.
>
> We don't hate, we have just been correcting your lies and mistaken
> statements which is what adults do. We just want you to pay your way and
> stop stealing money that is needed to reduce or eliminate congestion.
>
> The train people are causing great damage to society with the increased
> pollution, fuel consumption, and increased CO2 they are causing by taking
> funds away from the primary transportation mode. This problem must be
> corrected for the good of society.
>
> The cost of rail commute is somewhere in the range of $10 to $50 per commute
> direction per person. When you are ready to pay your fair share as are car
> drivers, then the problem will go away.

And when you pay yours. Your roads are highly SUBSIDIZED, a situation that can perhaps be corrected by tolls. The proceeds from it then go to SUBSIDIZE ALTERNATIVE TRANSPORTATION.
>
> > > So the Muslim culture should be changed, but they shouldn't resist that,
> > > let alone try to change ours... Funny.
> > >
> > > Do you expect every Arab family to swap the camel for an SUV? Or
> > > everyone of their kids get a 'happy meal' a day?
> >
> > Think about it. If a car nut allowed that there was another acceptable
> > culture, then eventually someone would ask if our culture is as good as it
> > could be. Sooner or later, someone is going to figure out that our heavy
> > reliance on the private automobile is not optimal.
>
> None of the train supporters have offered a single valid reason why this
> would be true. All we gotten is half baked theories than are enevitatibley
> wrong along with a lot of lies.

No, our proposal is fully cooked and ready to eat. ;)

>
> Now is your chance. Give a solid reason or two why more funding of transit
> would make society more optimal. We know that it is not the environment,

How do you know? Twenty people in a trolley pollute less than 20 SUVs on the road. We can ask grade school dropouts and I bet you they figure it out...

> We know that it is not reducing congestion.

Same question: What occupies more space, a trolley car or 20 SUVs?

Passing grade for 3rd grade... ;)

> We know that it is not reduction of oil consumption.

Jesus, again, 20 SUVs consume less than a trolley?

> We know that it is not reductions in CO2.

Actually we had it in mind, it works the other way around too?

Failing grade for 5th grade.

> We know that it is not a more desirable commute for most people.

For many people, yes; for other people, no. People is not all the same, contrary to Marxist theory.

> We know that it is not for greater security from terrorist.

Well, the more money they got, the sooner they'd get the scary stuff. Plus less reliance on foreign puppet regimes.

> We know that it is not to move the infirm people around.

What do you want them to do, drive too? They do at the moment. Terror on the roads.

> We know that it is not the best or most cost effective solution for the
> poor.

What's you solution, that they keep driving their beat-up "transportations" until they finally fall apart?
>
> What is the compelling advantage of transit?

Well, the burden of proof should be on your side. A BASIC TENET OF CAPITALISM IS THAT COMPETITION IS GOOD. Prove that the CAR MONOPOLY is good. And if it is, for who?

> > If the US military packed up their bags and left the Middle East today,
> > the Saudis and others would pick up the slack. They would build up a
> > great army to protect their wealth. While the price of oil would be much
> > higher (the Saudis would pass on their security costs), there is no reason
> > to believe that the marketplace would be instable. Even if there were
> > price instability, this could easily be solved by the futures market.
>
> Do they have a technology base to build a modern military. No way and there
> is probably no way they will get there. Do they have or will they ever
> have the intelligence resources needed to fight the terrorist. Probably
> never happen. I don't think you have any concept of how difficult it is to
> build a highly effective miltary. It is not just learning to shoot.

Well, if they don't have it, buy it. Plenty of money and plenty of mercenaries around. ;)

>
> Are the terrorist only in Saudi Arabia. No, they are world wide. Fighting
> terrorist must be a world wide effort.

Worldwide as well as personal effort. Some people though want to keep partying like is 1999...
>
> Its possible you could have a point, but I think the situation is far too
> complex for a technically unsophisticated, small country like Saudi Arabia.
> A single point failure like a weak Saudi Arabia would be a disaster.

A disaster... But for who? ;)
  • 0




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Copyright © 2016 Pravda.Ru