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

#3861 donquijote

donquijote

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3919 posts

Posted 12 September 2004 - 05:35 AM

<I havent made any comment about Orwell, partly because it was so long agao that I read Animal Farm that I have no perception in relation to him as an author. On the other hand he has been
labelled an insider, not sure if he was involved with British intelligence in some way so again, question marks as to his motive.>

How about "1984"? I bet you that if you read it again you would recognize...us.:)

You would recognize the lion too...;)
  • 0

#3862 Bader

Bader

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1757 posts

Posted 12 September 2004 - 05:47 AM

Things not being what they seem I would say he would vote for Kerry.
Kerry has played the same card as Nixon- we going to pull out of
Iraq, which means he will get more involved.
More involment means the game gets messier and instability goes more global, thats on the basis of Bin Laden being involved in increasing instability and who he works for seems irrelivant as its the lions game anyway and the corporations cant miss making more huge profits which means the family prospers as well.
Can anyone actually classify Bin Laden?
Kerry's conditions that he will withdraw from Iraq on are unattainable and made so by the US-Zionist policy by which they have prosecuted this invasion and occupation. He knows he will have a cop-out excuse to stay and expand the war even though he said the vietnam war was wrong and Iraq is becoming identical.
The war on school children by terrorists appear to be non-Chechen, using the Chechen rebels/struggle for independance a
smokescreen. I would expect a 'Bin Laden' to be a key player in this and have a lot more planned to spread the instability north
from Iraq into Russia. A Kerry copy of the Nixon or should we say Kissinger response would help a bin laden no end. On the one hand you get informal terrorism and its destruction and on the other state terrorism which kills all in its path to make sure the terrorists that might be there get killed. What Bush is saying about sticking to their guns is what the Whitehouse will do regardless of the election outcome- they will go to the extent of destroying the world to get to the last terrorist seems to be the mindset. The remedy is more lethal than the disease. Both originated from the same lion. Puppet show.
If 30% of Iraqis have cancer from radiation, as some claim, many knowing they will die anyway might just decide to become terrorists in the same frame of mind but more fatalistic than the Palestinian suicide bombers, and become cannon fodder for 'bin laden' type' operations anywhere.
On the other hand they might decide to select their own targets,
including 'bin laden' and the corporate high flyers. After all there are no rules.
The other advantage from voting Kerry is that the 'crime' goes out of sight with the scapegoat if Kerry takes over the spotlight.
The build up of any case against Bush wont encumber the White
(Black) House, and there are few things starting to build up which are all way too late to get him in office if they (power behind the throne) have already decided to dump him.
Anyway I doubt it will mean much difference which Bonesman gets in, the puppet show will go on.
  • 0

#3863 donquijote

donquijote

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3919 posts

Posted 12 September 2004 - 06:13 AM

<Things not being what they seem I would say he would vote for Kerry.>

I'd say Bush, the one burns more oil and whose lion's face is more recognizable.
  • 0

#3864 Pliny

Pliny

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3587 posts

Posted 12 September 2004 - 09:04 AM

I did enjoy that article by Suprynowycz, DonQ.
I liked the one by Pallast as well. Paul Krugman is an economist and supporter of the Keynesian theory of government manipulation of the economy and not well liked at the Mises Institute.

I have some interesting news of Venezuela. It seems Chavez is more interested in real justice and not making everyone equal by seizing from those that have and giving to those that haven't. Or righting old injustices, real or imagined but starting with a new slate.

I believe he can keep the CIA out and any other outside negative influences. The oil in Venezuela will allow him to accomplish that.
I think he is genuine in his efforts but we will see. A lion for the people? Is that a possibility?

By the way, Bader. I don't intend this as a dig in any manner just as a fact. There still are some Aberhart dollars around so he obviously byassed the federal governments prohibition of him creating an Alberta currency. It was never intended to replace Canadian currency but it did exist. The Canadian government could probably have legislated against it after the fact. That seems more likely.
  • 0

#3865 woj1@cyberonic.

woj1@cyberonic.

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 10667 posts

Posted 12 September 2004 - 10:25 AM

Originally posted by Pliny
As if they can match the expenditure. But police are less necessary because people live in terror of them.



I understand, that you as a Ukrainian are outraged for killing million Ukrainian by Stalin. It was very wrong, that Stalin consider ed people as replenished material.
Stalin being under continued threat of counterrevolution, Japan invasion etc thought differently about his obligations that you do.

For him the most important were country borders he inherited and country transformation to industrial power. For the western machinery Stalin only could paid with grain.

When Ukraine during tsar time were leading food exporter for Germany , England, during Stalin time production of Ukraine dropped as a result of collectivization to tenth of her production .

Stalin saw it as sabotage, criminal act. He couldn
  • 0

#3866 Bader

Bader

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1757 posts

Posted 12 September 2004 - 10:47 AM

Howdy Pliny:

I am not interested in vague notions of SC you might have, clearly
you have little idea of what its about and thats a neutral fact,
and so there is no need to try and clarify anything now as I am interested in understanding how your proposal will work.
Likewise regards what money is and its function, similarly we have different conceptions out of different perceptions.
I will agree a 100% reserve is better/sounder than fractional reserve banking.

It has been clarified that your proposal is that the people own the gold and I have taken it to mean not the gold in the ground
but in the bank.
I take it as well, just as an aside, that the banks will also own gold which they can lend against, which is the same principle as 'i cant afford a house so I will rent one owned by someone else'.
From there Banks need to be checked on to ensure they dont lend or spend more than the gold they hold.
Some one will have to provide that service and charge for it.
We now are starting to get into issues relating to the Govt being seperate from economic issues.
The issue or next question is how is it aquired because for a citizen to have practical functioning citizenship of society everyone must have their own gold, (libertarian principle each must provide
for/be responsible for their own) just as they have their own money (income) right now. And this becomes a thing of continuing demand/supply as the economy, cost of living and the population grows. At some point in the future, if there was enough gold now, the supply will run out which will have the same impact as the volumn of goods and services reaching a ceiling.
How are you going to address the practicalities for people who struggle to make ends meet to have to buy gold as well. Or
borrow from banks which they dont have to now meaning the cost of living will go up as though the rate of pay they currently have now will be reduced.
If we were going to change over to a chip system of purely electronic accounting and it cost a thousand dollars to buy a chip,
a percentage of the population will be selling much property,
perhaps even their homes to buy a chip in order to buy food,
prevent power being cut off etc after a certain date if they havent got their chip. I see your system impacting the same.
If employers are going to start paying wages in gold after a certain date, where do they get it from?
IT will come via the market and as soon as the party in govt knows whats going to happen all the mps and their friends will be buying stocks and shares in gold firms right because the price is about to go up and every citizen by decree will have to pay the market price which will never go down because the govt has
made it indispensible to every citizen for everything they want to buy and much else they do in activities.
There are concerns right now about the supplies of oil in relation to increasing demand and clearly gold is just as necessary yet the supplies of gold are not large.
You claim that the knowledge of the past fraudulent practice
regards gold will prevent it from happening again. It didnt last time, eg as exposed in 1914, after the goldsmiths had done the same in earlier times.
History shows in my understanding that regardless of whether money is based on gold or not private control, and the state can do the same, is what allows the system to become abused. Changing to any particular commodity makes no difference. The only thing going for it in your system is that you have the gold (base of the money system)owned by the people, rather than a monolopoly.
We both agree on the people owning and controlling the money system. Thats where the security is. Its not in gold if there was enough and the cost and market response to demand didnt effect the cost of living.
The only value in gold is that of its psychological effect, the notion that it is as safe as houses/market acceptance and that it is visual
and appears to be simple and straight forward. Its not the latter because the public have been easliy fooled buy a false sense of security. I see it as being important more because it has the elusion of security, so one starts with gold as a substitute for security. To consider any alternative one has the psychological hitch that you are sacrificing security if you go away from gold. Thats what socialist feel about the state. They cant consider anything else because the state represents security. Both are an expensive burdon like debt.
The fraudulent money system has created a class society and in your system what I see is simply the transfer of the phoney class sytem into a reformed monetary system. While it will be honest
within itself it doesnt undo the suffered dishonestly inherent from the present system. The handicapped will remain handicaped by their inability to buy gold or enough gold to reverse what they inherited adversly from this present system. Life could become more unbearable as the cost of gold goes through the roof.
There will still be mortgages and borrowing against Bank gold/gold savings and interest rates and businesses doing the same just as now. The more the rich put aside the less gold there is to circulate and thus the demand to borrow on the saved increases making savers bigger collectors and the cycle grows tighter and tighter.
Limited gold resouces, very expensive to mine, increasing savings may make the cost of living as bad or worse as a debt system. Quality of life will go down as the cost of living goes up.
No social policy, no safety nets, govt is not interested. Revolution time. Can see why the few who will become very rich and powerful will want everyone to pay for their protection from the masses.
Your system will require extra bureaucracy to either register all
gold inside a universal system so all units of gold can be matched after transactions without moving or gold will have to be moved around like paper is as well as the current paper recording system. In the former which is so much easier, the gold could be all stored in one place and never ever move and not actually do anything except act as an expensive insurance policy because the practical world will realy just carry one through paper changing hands in paralle with goods changing hands. Being people owned and thus cant be used fraudulently, over time people are going to say, what difference does it make if we sold it
for industrial use and as a commodity back on the market and use the money for something more practical and reduce the cost of living.

There is still the issue of democracy in relation to representatives,
lawmaking. If you only have a minister of Police, minister of justice and minister of defence, they may as well toss a coin to see who become the Prime Minster, the deputy and then last one can act as opposition by playing the devils advocate.
The people will be unrepresented and have no say at this stage
until you answer.
All state roads, schools, hospitals etc will be sold and everything will be user pays.

The notion that people can vote largesse for themselves is on the face of it a fools paradise. However on closer think its quite a synical disposition when one thinks about the people living in parks, slaving for multi-national corporations, working overtime for no pay, etc,etc, etc.
My observation has been that as technology and wealth has improved in western civilisation the public expectation and the
promises held out by political parties who buy votes are all based on what is exected from a modern progressive society. I have yet to find anyone prepared to stand up and say to society around them they should all follow the Amish way of life where time and technology stands still and we dont get into debt trying keep up with the Jones. Are you prepared to Pliny?
How many business people would vote for you?
  • 0

#3867 woj1@cyberonic.

woj1@cyberonic.

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 10667 posts

Posted 12 September 2004 - 11:29 AM

Originally posted by Bader
Howdy DonQ:
I
There seems to be little treasures to be found and made public to confuse and that last post is a good example: what is going on in Venezuela? It seems to be a situation in which anyone of any political persuasion can find something to feel good about.

I just joking about the swastika due to the popular image of national socialism. What is it realy? A German socialist party
created a rightwing regime, had some great ideas for providing
certain things to all citizens while the multi-nationals helped build
a go-ahead nation with depression all around, while at the same time built the most modern war machine that was very hard to stop.
Huge collateral damge along the way. IN some ways it was a little like Venesuela in that it had something that all could fine to praise both left and right.
I have for a long time considered the Third Reich as a window of the future. Many of it characteristics are becoming features of todays world which confirms my suspicion.
For you I expect you want a socialistic state that is its own boss
not subject to any form of imperialism. Dubchek may have produced a good society initially in this regard but the major falt of socialism is that the power dynamics will attract the wrong people who will abuse the power as they do everywhere. You must realise that a successful Czecoslovakia would have been an enemy of the CCCP and Wall st. The lion in whom you trust is a bad lion.



I don
  • 0

#3868 woj1@cyberonic.

woj1@cyberonic.

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 10667 posts

Posted 12 September 2004 - 11:56 AM

Originally posted by Bader
Check out this site Woj:

tells you where the 'terrorists' in Jugoslavia originated etc.

www.globalresearch.ca/articles/CHO405E.html



Tom Lantos D, , Joseph Lieberman, D, Diane Feinstein, Joseph Bidden , D, Barbara Boxer,D, John McCain,R , , Nancy Pelocy, D, Soros D, were main supporters of US aggression against Yugoslavia.
They are also main supporters og J. Kerry for president. :D

Slavs were to be completely out of their mind if they would vote for Kerry for president. . :D
  • 0

#3869 donquijote

donquijote

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3919 posts

Posted 12 September 2004 - 12:08 PM

How can you destroy something in order to save it?:confused:

Well, this what the military claims with a straight face, while 13 Iraqis, and one member of their own lapdog press are victims of it. It doesn't matter, people is already used to the lie...;)


'Insurgents opened fire on the Americans, destroying a Bradley fighting vehicle on Haifa street, a major avenue in the center of the capital. The four U.S. crewmen escaped with minor injuries, U.S. officials said.

As the Americans withdrew, jubilant fighters and young boys swarmed around the burning vehicle, dancing and cheering. Several young men placed a black banner of al-Qaida-backed Tawhid and Jihad, led by terror mastermind Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, in the barrel of the Bradley's main gun.

Suddenly, a U.S. Apache attack helicopter swooped down and opened fire around the Bradley. Witnesses said several people, including a correspondent for the Arabic language Al-Arabiya television station, were killed.

Maj. Phil Smith, a spokesman for the 1st Cavalry Division, said the helicopter fired to try to destroy the burning vehicle "for the safety of the people around it."

Health Ministry official Saad al-Amili said 13 people were killed and 55 wounded
  • 0

#3870 donquijote

donquijote

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3919 posts

Posted 12 September 2004 - 12:17 PM

<I have some interesting news of Venezuela. It seems Chavez is more interested in real justice and not making everyone equal by seizing from those that have and giving to those that haven't. Or righting old injustices, real or imagined but starting with a new slate.

I believe he can keep the CIA out and any other outside negative influences. The oil in Venezuela will allow him to accomplish that.
I think he is genuine in his efforts but we will see. A lion for the people? Is that a possibility?>

Howdy Pliny
He registers high in the "lion meter.";)

His best pals, American corporations and Castro will make sure he remains so.

Any new lion faces the critical decision of being bad and survive, and being good and be eaten. That's why only good project is one where the people have the plan in hand and don't wait for bureaucratic orders. They need experts, not from Cuba, but from successful models, and then be creative to improve on it or adapt to Venezuela's circumstances.
  • 0

#3871 donquijote

donquijote

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3919 posts

Posted 12 September 2004 - 12:53 PM

This a response I got...

> Are you in favor of more work or more Pina Colada?
>
> 'By creating the lifelines allowing each of us to meet our basic needs
> (food, housing, healthcare, etc) and extras (culture, arts, music) so
> that though people won't have to quit their "day-jobs", for the first
> time ever they will have an honest choice, and the freedom to chose to
> do so if they so desire (the common phrase "Thank God It's Friday" in
> the mainstream economy suggests how most may vote with their feet,
> when we finally make a viable alternative available to them).'
> (http://www.economicdemocracy.org/)

Thanks for quoting us.

http://economicdemoc...org/projs.shtml

to be exact.

Lots of long-term projects there, which won't
arrive overnight, but are very much workable.

If you want to see a project that already exists
and is working see www.ithacahealth.org
which is a way to cut out the corporate (and also government)
middleman for health insurance. Anyone, those outside
Ithacda included, can join. What credit unions
are to banks, and coop food marts are to large corporate
supermarkets, this is to corporate HMO health care: the democratic
grassroots nonprofit alterantive. Not just non profit but democraticdally
run. And those who fear 'big government' (which is a danger,
but right now a much larger one is big corporate power)
well that is without the federal or state government either.

The http://economicdemoc...org/projs.shtml has other projects.

One we are working on is a democratic alternative to Wall Street.

Wall street is completely unsustainable. see

http://economicdemoc...rg/wall-st.html

or http://economicdemoc...wall-st-ii.html

Or notice what happens if the Dow Jones goes up by a teeny tiny
4.75% after inflation: after 100 years, you have (1.045)^100 or about
100 times. Do you think we can have 100 times the level
of resource extraction from our finite planet? Those who
have followed the environment know that's laughable. But
if you are still not skeptical, consider what happens after 200
years: you have grown by 100*100 or 10,000 as much.

Do you think we can extract 10,000 times the amount of economic
activity, energy, resources, etc from this planet? In 300
years it is 100*100*100 or one million times. Before long
it's easy to convince yourself that this growth-based economics
cannot possibly go on forever, and in fact, 300 years is alreaady
impossible and 100 years at 4.75% would mean we'd already be
using 100 times the economic activity, already madness. In 50
years, the sqare root of 100 is 10 so in 50yrs, the Dow would
be 10 times the current size and 50 years after that it'd
be 10 times THAT size, or 100 times today's size. The
whole stock market was a short term thing in human history..just
like oil, which even the mainstream media talk about peak oil
now (front page of National Geographic) but even if oil
was infinite (which it's not) we'd run out of resources
or pollute the planet beyond liveability sooner or later
and the way things are going, sooner.

Even the Conference Board just reported that climate change
(global warming) is an 'urgent' problem

http://www.evworld.c...que&newsid=6509

more here

http://economicdemoc...te-summary.html

but http://economicdemocracy.org/
in the main is about positive alternatives. It's
a very tall order, but a necessary one, to envision
an alternative retirement system to wall street,
the rough outline is here by another activist:

http://www.ithacanews.org/wise.html

and we hope to coopratively work with them.

Those who can't understand these ideas and ignore them at their
own peril. A few patriotic 'revolutionaries'
are obviously on this board as our website was
mentioned so these are some links for starting your own exploration.

-ED

"Rats and roaches live by competition under the laws of supply and
demand. It is the privilege of human beings to live under the laws of
justice and mercy." - Wendell Berry


= = = =
STILL FEELING LIKE THE MAINSTREAM U.S. CORPORATE MEDIA
IS GIVING A FULL HONEST PICTURE OF WHAT'S GOING ON?
= = = =
Daily online radio show, news reporting: www.DemocracyNow.org
More news: UseNet's misc.activism.progressive (moderated)
= = = =
Sorry, we cannot read/reply to most usenet posts but welcome email
FOR MORE INFORMATION: http://EconomicDemocracy.org/wtc/ (peace)
http://economicdemoc...te-summary.html (Climate)
And http://EconomicDemocracy.org/ (general)
  • 0

#3872 Pliny

Pliny

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3587 posts

Posted 12 September 2004 - 01:41 PM

From there Banks need to be checked on to ensure they dont lend or spend more than the gold they hold.....We now are starting to get into issues relating to the Govt being seperate from economic issues.



It is a question of law and thus justice and is a mandate of government.

The issue or next question is how is it aquired .....



The currency is issued with the statement it is redeemable in gold
just as it used to be and thus restoring it back to the people.

And this becomes a thing of continuing demand/supply as the economy, cost of living and the population grows. At some point in the future, if there was enough gold now, the supply will run out which will have the same impact as the volumn of goods and services reaching a ceiling.



If the commodity gets scarce it becomes more valuable. Congratulations your dollar just became two dollars. The quantity of gold is not a factor. It's value is not stable but based on supply and demand as any other product. If it becomes too scarce and an ounce becomes worth $10,000 there are other metals that can be used such as silver and platinum. The currency would then say on it redeemable in silver or platinum or it would be guaranteed by law to be redeemable.
People will not have to buy gold. If they have any currency at all, it is as good as gold. They work, they get their pay in the form of a currency that represents gold.

Basically, the function of gold is only a guard, to keep wealth in the hands of the populace and thus prevent government from becoming a tyrant over the people. It prevents government form just printing up currency to spend. It has to get it from the people.

How do you think real gold coin was used before there were fiat paper currencies? The currency was gold. Gold was a commodity, thus money was a commodity, thus currency was a commodity.
Gold, today, is still a commodity but money and currency are no longer commodities. If money and currency at least still represented a commodity it could be traded as a commodity in a market.
If I have an ounce of gold I can trade it with anyone who will accept an ounce of gold in trade. I will always be able to trade it for whatever an ounce of gold will trade for in the marketplace, be it $35 or $500.

Robbery and plunder were commonplace then and gold tended to collect in the hands of bankers for safekeeping

A fiat paper currency, as a commodity, is almost worthless. The government says it is good for trade but if they didn't I would just have a piece of paper. If it was a commodity like gold then it would not matter what the governement said. It would always be worth what the market value was. You can imagine the scenario that a society could consider gold to be of no value but it is a commodity. Chances of that happening in our society are slim to none.


You claim that the knowledge of the past fraudulent practice regards gold will prevent it from happening again. It didnt last time, eg as exposed in 1914, after the goldsmiths had done the same in earlier times.

If you want to be continually duped go ahead. That's a silly argument.

Life could become more unbearable as the cost of gold goes through the roof.

If the people have the gold life becomes more easy as the value goes up. They do not have to buy gold. They work for it just like money. Inflation will be dead.
Think of money as gold. If I have a house and, as you say, gold becomes scarce and more valuable then I will be able to buy two houses. The price of gold going up would be a good thing. It would encourage spending and put more gold in circulation from peoples savings. Then if the price of gold went down it encourages saving because the price of things would then be going up in comparison. The scarcity of gold would be a better thing than the overabundance of gold as far as an active marketplace.

I have yet to find anyone prepared to stand up and say to society around them they should all follow the Amish way of life where time and technology stands still and we dont get into debt trying keep up with the Jones.

That is exactly what socialists will unknowingly get. How can a socialist society change? The decision makers are terrified of change or anyone thinking independantly. They must use force to maintain the status quo. The only change is what they authorize not what is demanded by the people. That is with the use of force. I do not believe that without force a socialist system will sustain itself.
The Amish do because of their common, strong religious beliefs.
That bond provides the force, not physical force but psychological.
People today can't even commit to a marriage let alone an agreement to communal living.

I have to get going. More later.
  • 0

#3873 Pliny

Pliny

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3587 posts

Posted 12 September 2004 - 01:54 PM

Originally posted by woj1@cyberonic.
I understand, that you as a Ukrainian are outraged for killing million Ukrainian by Stalin. It was very wrong, that Stalin consider ed people as replenished material.
Stalin being under continued threat of counterrevolution, Japan invasion etc thought differently about his obligations that you do.

For him the most important were country borders he inherited and country transformation to industrial power. For the western machinery Stalin only could paid with grain.

When Ukraine during tsar time were leading food exporter for Germany , England, during Stalin time production of Ukraine dropped as a result of collectivization to tenth of her production .

Stalin saw it as sabotage, criminal act. He couldn-t feed industrial workers, and he had no money to pay for working equipment for industry to build country defense and prosperity.

Stalin didn-t hate Ukrainians, he had Ukrainian wife, she committed suicide when , Stalin didn-t buy out his pilot son from Germans, and Germans killed him during his attempt to escape-

We can blame Stalin for many things, actually often committed by his coworkers as for example Beria who murdered of 45 thousand Polish officers in Kathyn changing Statin order of sending them to Syberia, but we must recognize Stalin as leader of strong Slav country , what was his goal.

BTW. How you would in Stalin position maintain integrity of the country, not having any means?



Counter- revolution is always the fear of the communist.
There is no integrity between different peoples. Only a common bond maintains integrity. Stalin used military force.
  • 0

#3874 donquijote

donquijote

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3919 posts

Posted 12 September 2004 - 02:42 PM

Originally posted by Pliny
That is exactly what socialists will unknowingly get. How can a socialist society change? The decision makers are terrified of change or anyone thinking independantly. They must use force to maintain the status quo. The only change is what they authorize not what is demanded by the people. That is with the use of force. I do not believe that without force a socialist system will sustain itself.



Is that force required in Scandinavian countries? I'm sure they are *far* more stable than America. That's because the main contributor to stabilicty is...JUSTICE, both political and economical.;)


The Amish do because of their common, strong religious beliefs.
That bond provides the force, not physical force but psychological.
People today can't even commit to a marriage let alone an agreement to communal living.



I'm sure there can be other factors: FEAR OF THE LION, SAFETY FOR THEIR CHILDREN, QUALITY OF LIFE, SOCIALIZATION...

Here are some good reasons why people would join coops if given the choice...

"Most people are living on Kibbutz Arava for two reasons: 1.) to be able to work for themselves [no politician, no bureaucrat, no boss, in other words, no lion], and 2.) to be able to raise their children in a safe and comfortable environment [in other words, no jungle]. In a world whose cities are increasingly becoming more polarized and violent, these basic wants/needs are synonymous with life on a kibbutz.

Internally, Kibbutz Arava functions rather communally and ecologically. There is a central dining room and commons area. Food that is eaten in the dining room arrives as bulk, wholesale crates, thus eliminating retail wastes such as packaging and plastic wrappers. The kibbutz is a pedestrian community. People are able to walk and ride their bikes to any kibbutz activity. In fact, there are only five leisure cars available for the 130 adult members. On kibbutz, people don't throw much away. When things break, they are fixed either by the garage, carpentry shop, or laundry. Things are not easily thrown away, as items are scarce. There are public commodities, such as a coffee and tea lounge, a pool, an entertainment area, a computer and fax room, a music studio, and a horse stable. By offering these amenities, the kibbutz eliminates the need for everyone to have their own TV, computer, etc [no consumerism, which feeds the lion]."

*MOST RECOMMENDED: "Behind Consumption and Consumerism"*
http://www.globaliss...Consumption.asp
  • 0

#3875 donquijote

donquijote

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3919 posts

Posted 12 September 2004 - 03:11 PM

A man made oasis... It sounds good to me. Later I want to bring an article on water management on the kibbutz as applicable to Australia. While China experiments with big dams the kibbutz plays with micromanagement. Small is beautiful...;)


What would you think of modern, civilized, rational & grown up people, who decide to make the desert their home?....

3,000 adults and children, who live in the 11 settlements of the EILOT Region (5 to 40 minutes drive north of EILAT, part of the southern ARAVA Desert) prove that not only can one survive in harsh desert conditions without necessarily being a Bedouin. but that a good life can be had there.
Modern, high-standard living, with all the latest facilities, hi-tech equipment and arrangements for labor and leisure; gardening; junior and high-school education; scientifically developed agriculture... this fascinating Microcosm, a man made oasis, can be visited and observed - with explanations and background descriptions given by a local guide (who actually lives there).
And do not forget: We are speaking of collective communities, probably with the highest rate of mutual support, sharing, and cooperation known in the world - the Kibbutzim!

http://www.yotvata.o...vev-yotvata.htm
  • 0

#3876 donquijote

donquijote

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3919 posts

Posted 12 September 2004 - 03:58 PM

Of course, forget about the politics of it. We are talking here HOW TO BUILD THE WATER WELL...literally.;)

Israel has developed some unique solutions to water scarcity, which is a major problem around the world, notably China. Among them the most obvious of building reservoirs for floodwater runoff, expanding by 6% the freshwater supply.

But while this is not about politics, good politics can make it happen, whether left or right. What do you think, guys? Can we bring those engineers when we have our Banana Revolution going?:cool:

[Alan Tal, expert in the field, giving lecture in Australia]

'A word about each is in order as our experience with them is part of the accumulated wisdom I'm supposed to
be sharing. And once again, I'll supplement the narrative with some slides. The deserts of Israel in particular
are home to saline "fossil aquifers." To a certain extent, water extraction here is probably closer to "mining" but in
some areas, such as the Arava rift valley that sits as a catchment for a large mountainous area, recharge is
probably sufficient to replace present withdrawals. Or at least so the water ever-optimistic water managers tell
us.
Typically these waters are high, not only in salt but in other minerals, such as fluoride. The old-time kibbutz
members down south in the Arava are starting exhibit symptoms of hyperfloridemia, the blackening of teeth and
more seriously brittleness of bones that comes from years of imbibing high fluoride waters.
Nonetheless, these waters are still being used for the surprisingly successful desert agriculture v most
impressively dates. After going through reverse osmosis, they are used for drinking as well. I might add that for
thirty years now, on my kibbutz, like the whole of the Arava regions, houses have three taps in every kitchen and
bathroom: Hot water; cold water; and drinking water. It is, I'm sad to say, a vision of the future for the rest of
Israel, and perhaps, one day in South Australia as well. So the lesson is that brackish water is still water and
new communities in South Australia who live above brackish aquifers might be "wise" to install separate delivery
systems.
Floodwaters have been the target of work by the Jewish National Fund. As I'm a member of the international
board of the Fund that sits in Jerusalem, I suppose, the great Israeli tradition of shameless self-promotion
requires that I say a word or two about our efforts in this regard. David Ben Gurion, our founding father and first
Prime Minister wrote dolefully about all that good water that was getting wasted as it flowed into the sea without
benefiting the thirsty soil. Even today, about 50% of Israel's rainfall ends up flowing to the Mediterranean.
Capturing rainwater run-off, especially in the semi-arid desert is not a new idea. The ancient Nabiteans were
harvesting runoff all over our Negev desert quite effectively just about the time when Jesus was walking on water
in the north. But only in the last few years has our country made a major effort to "harvest" runoff.
Ever short of funds, the government left the work to the Jewish National Fund, which is a sustainable
development corporation owned by the Jewish people worldwide. Although rainwater harvesting is a simple idea,
it is not an inexpensive one. So far the JNF has built 164 reservoirs, about half of these capture floodwater
runoff. The new reservoirs have expanded Israel's freshwater supply by a little more than 6% and helps ground
water recharge.
Here, I would be remiss if I didn't mention the impressive contribution of Australia's Jewish community to the
effort. A one million cubic meter reservoir was built in the valley of Beit Shean in the early 1990s to the tune of 2
million Australian dollars. And then a few years later, 3 million dollars was raised to build a reservoir in the Besor
basin, down in the Negev desert. The reservoir can hold 1.5 million cubic meters of rainfall that would otherwise,
evaporate or be a drop in the Mediterranean Sea. It's a one-time investment and barring earthquakes, a source
of water that will last forever. So here again, South Australia can find a lot of wisdom among Israeli engineers
should ever need to learn how they eventually got to building reservoirs in optimal locations.'
  • 0

#3877 Bader

Bader

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1757 posts

Posted 12 September 2004 - 07:39 PM

Howdy Pliny:

I only have a record of the early stages of the Alberhart govt
and that didnt give details of their policies. Douglas got cold feet
from his interaction across the Atlantic and didnt get involved.
What took place was Alberhart social credit. I know what Douglas
the originator of a proposal for a full social credit society, which
isnt limited to just monetary reform, represents. He wasnt into merely reforming but to replacing the existing money system and accounting system.
I have no doubt Alberhart wouldnt have gone anywhere near
what Douglas has advocated. I am unaware of any account of the Alberhart govt years which by their length, what was it 26 or
thirty odd years shows he did something that pleased the people, which is the litmus test of democracy.
What I have on record included Alberharts application to federal govt which was declined. The notes produced subsequently would have been legal tender and obviously not the only legal tender which would limit major reforms. However obviously the local notes were honoured which is any currencies kiss of life.
I havent heard of any condemnation of those years.
All the major politcal parties are married to the fraudulent money system and attack anything that advocates any kind of reform
or exposure of the existing system. We had it here and the big
scare was by calling it funny-money which fits the present system and claim it was just printing money and creating inflation which is also what the present system does, yet no one has ever produced statistics from the first Labour govt in NZ which was
inspired by SC and issued Reserve Bank Credit of creating inflation to get the nation back on its feet during the depression while Wall ST and the Bank of England was preparing for war to
get them back on their feet.
The label SC can be as meaningless as capitalism and democracy.
Both get condemned on this thread because of their bad performance and sham. I still advocate real democracy as I do
Douglas SC because they are the real thing. Founded on the same principles-people ruling.
Most people I have met who claim to be Social Crediters are really just monetary reformers. Because they have become aware of the nature of the presentfraudulent banking systmen through SC literature and adopted a disposition of returning the
power to create and cancel money to the people, an aspect of the
definition of SC, they thus consider themselves Social Crediters. But similarly many people believe in everyone having a vote and claim to be democrats. Even communists vote!
There are monetary reform movements, which have little or no knowledge of SC and dont appear interested. They are in the main concerned with getting rid of interest rates and having the govt create the money, as Lincoln advocated. The risk is that
politicians can abuse the power as the bankers do. Plus the money is debt anyway since it has to be repaid. They accept a half percent or one percent interest to cover administration costs
of servicing the system.
Then there is a smaller group who advocate debt free money and may or may not make a difference between the govt or some
autonimous authority which govt cant manipulate have the job of issuing the money.
Most SCers are in the two catigories above. I am talking labels
which I have said many times before can be meaningless.
Douglas even opposed political parties, yet Alberhart formed a
party and we have had them in NZ and Britain. And the call themselves SC inspite of the fact Douglas opposed it. Parties usurp the peoples political power just as the bankers usurp their financial power. So a true SC society would include a political and financial change. He goes into constitutional issues as well.
They are all interrelated and you advocate breaking them up.
Most Social Crediters have never gone past a superficial understanding of the present banking system and I would say
the same holds true of the monetary reformers. The impact of discovering how society is being ripped off and the collusion of govt and political parties is such that they never really go any further, they just want to see soemthing done about it and that
is what I think is the main reason people dont go any further
plus the details of the systems can be mind boggling and most people tend to get lazy and prefer someone else do the spade work while they wait for some one motivated to do something about things as Alberhart obviously was: an ecception to the rule, a natural born mover/instigater.
Was his local money a state one or a peoples one. If it was the latter he was on the right path. It would have taken a lot of courage to go public and put your money where your mouth is.
  • 0

#3878 Bader

Bader

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1757 posts

Posted 13 September 2004 - 02:19 AM

Howdy DonQ:
I will have to get back to these references later.

Howdy Pliny:
Finance/economic usually comes under the Minister of Finance.
Your govt is to keep out of these.
The argument that it comes under Law is a bit of a cop-out since much of present govt business is governed by law and so please explain how it is practical is shrink govt. And the issues about
peoples representative etc remains unanswered still (I realise you cant answer everything at once.)

To just say money is redeemable by gold doesnt answer the question. I cant see how it will be just as before since you change the just as before govt and banking set up.
I listed three alternative ways the gold supply can be instituted
and two of them- private banking corps and govt are out thus leaving as you answered the people to see to the reserve. It remains to be explained how they will do it. This has to happen before any currency is issued with the writing on it saying redeemable in gold, platinum, silver, cooper or plastic or disposable nappies. Govt cant organise it on behalf of the people
which theretically they function as, since you define this as socialism.
So you will have to set up a public service outside govt or contract out the job of aquiring gold at the cheapest price on world markets. Saying the people wont have to buy gold is contrary to what you have already said.

If gold goes up in value: it makes more profit for those who market it (one dollar becomes two) as oil but becomes more expensive for the consumer who uses it.
For an economy to expand and if the population expands the reserve of gold will have to be expanded to increase the money supply. The more gold costs to expand the reserve is a cost that will pass to the consumer.
Dont get carried away with the thought of the gold in reserve going up and making your money more valuable because there are swings and round abouts. Gold goes up over three years,
expansion in the economy, then gold drops below where it was originally and factories close. The problems of inflation and deflation are still there, plus since you are using a commodity its value will rise and fall outside the control of the people and the currency will be related to others, perhaps who have natural supplies of gold which they can mine. If a country has a trade surplus it will have to maintain a balance of gold and money.
A democracy can keep govt out of the finance system by law and
systems not involving govt, so why become subject to a commodity outside the peoples control and the cost of buying in a reserve? X amount of the nations production will go on buying in gold. As people save it (out of circulation) the more others will have to borrow which raises their cost of living and as I mentioned before the ownership of the reserve becomes under the control of fewer and fewer people. You dont respond to that.
When the value of gold goes up they might rub their hands with glee but dont suggest the whole population will.

Historically it was when gold become the currency that the schemers got their hooks in.

You were the one who said it wouldnt happen because they had been caught out not me, I also thought it was nonsense. Same as saying if govt said the national currency was a bad risk no one would trust it. Thats less likely than the politicians telling the truth about less important things as they unable to now.

You are designing a system to fit the preconceived dictate that gold must insulate the finance system and govt must be shrunk to
a fragment.
I am not saying it wont work, the present one doesnt but is kept alive.
The motive appears reactionary- mainly against govt.
I prefer one built on the objective of empowering people to make their own decisions about how they want society to run including a secure money supply.
Bankers and the political party system are (indirectly) in collusion regards usurping the peoples power and corrupting democracy. Once people get control back of the money system they will control govt instead but that appears of little interest to you.

You havent responded to my line drawn in the sand yet.
  • 0

#3879 donquijote

donquijote

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3919 posts

Posted 13 September 2004 - 06:01 AM

Try watching the movie "Network." Best actors: Faye Dunaway, William Holden, Robert Duval...all presenting on screen the first case of a killing over bad ratings. Well, that's the argument but it's a powerful satire of the inner workings of the entertainment industry and the role of the ratings in determining what you see, eat, drive, or think. Just promise me one thing, get to the window and scream:

'I'm as mad as hell, and I'm not going to take this anymore!'

This is one the most powerful dialogs in the movie told by the anchorman who goes "crazy" and tells the truth...;)

I don't have to tell you things are bad. Everybody knows things are bad. It's a depression. Everybody's out of work or scared of losing their job. The dollar buys a nickel's work, banks are going bust, shopkeepers keep a gun under the counter. Punks are running wild in the street and there's nobody anywhere who seems to know what to do, and there's no end to it. We know the air is unfit to breathe and our food is unfit to eat, and we sit watching our TV's while some local newscaster tells us that today we had fifteen homicides and sixty-three violent crimes, as if that's the way it's supposed to be. We know things are bad - worse than bad. They're crazy. It's like everything everywhere is going crazy, so we don't go out anymore. We sit in the house, and slowly the world we are living in is getting smaller, and all we say is, 'Please, at least leave us alone in our living rooms. Let me have my toaster and my TV and my steel-belted radials and I won't say anything. Just leave us alone.' Well, I'm not gonna leave you alone. I want you to get mad! I don't want you to protest. I don't want you to riot - I don't want you to write to your congressman because I wouldn't know what to tell you to write. I don't know what to do about the depression and the inflation and the Russians and the crime in the street. All I know is that first you've got to get mad. (shouting) You've got to say, 'I'm a human being, god-dammit! My life has value!' So I want you to get up now. I want all of you to get up out of your chairs. I want you to get up right now and go to the window. Open it, and stick your head out, and yell, 'I'm as mad as hell, and I'm not going to take this anymore!' I want you to get up right now, sit up, go to your windows, open them and stick your head out and yell - 'I'm as mad as hell and I'm not going to take this anymore!' Things have got to change. But first, you've gotta get mad!...You've got to say, 'I'm as mad as hell, and I'm not going to take this anymore!' Then we'll figure out what to do about the depression and the inflation and the oil crisis. But first get up out of your chairs, open the window, stick your head out, and yell, and say it: 'I'm as mad as hell, and I'm not going to take this anymore!'

http://www.imdb.com/...9862660#9862660
  • 0

#3880 woj1@cyberonic.

woj1@cyberonic.

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 10667 posts

Posted 13 September 2004 - 06:16 PM

Originally posted by Pliny
Counter- revolution is always the fear of the communist.
There is no integrity between different peoples. Only a common bond maintains integrity. Stalin used military force.



I don
  • 0




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Copyright © 2016 Pravda.Ru