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

#1281 MarquisDeSade

MarquisDeSade

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 59 posts

Posted 14 October 2003 - 05:23 AM

Hi donq and bader, i would love to see bader's solution. i really hope it would convince me. my door is always open.

cheers

sade
  • 0

#1282 Bader

Bader

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1757 posts

Posted 14 October 2003 - 09:15 AM

Howdy Marq and DonQ and everyone else with a sense of humour.

I brush what DonQ says aside and DonQ brushes aside what
MarQ says and when I am frank and truthfull I am a bigot.
Well if one learns anything on threads it patience and one never knows when a challenge is coming next or from whom.
And we never stop learning and it is not without a price of some kind which is why many give up as soon as the going gets harder.

I thought it was rather ironic that after being put in my place for daring to hold to my own perspective that the place-maker then
posts a section of the evils of the banking system which was the core of my concern and perpective.
That one excert reveals the cold-blooded power and evil over
humanity and govt itself. For months I have indicated this as being the greater lion and how powerful a dictator it is, and finally
you are starting to see through the smoke. You have got the mirrors to de-mesmerize yet, in front of you, after the smoke clears a little more.
I have years ahead of you on this subject and I am still a learner.
That is why I am a bigot. Because I know I understand this
subject better and i know it is crucial. If it wasn't the lion would have set up shop in some other area of power.
AS old man Rothschild said: permit me to have the power to create the money and I don't care who makes the laws.

Money power is the greatest gravitational field ruling over the
activity and beliefs of man, and it buys the lawmakers who run the second biggest gravitation forces- the laws, rules and regulations that Marq observes discriminates to the advantage of the few.
This is why, to quote DonQ, "perhaps the other cities are under control of hungrey lions". (the reason the curitiba example is ignored)
Hense I see much of Curitiba as being, to quote DonQ again
" looking to improve the conditions of the jungle (doesn't pay)"
in as much as it can mean accepting the jungle and making the most of it.
Your ideal Marq is for a special leader to emerge that understands the system.
Mine is democracy which means the people need to understand
what it is and what it isn't and take the responsibility to see it works. ( a coop is a wee model of this)
In the meantime the bankers know how their system works
and will continue to sustain the smoke and mirrors and the
fat carrots for the witting and unwitting professionals on the take.

"Can you please, Bader, bring it forth ina few words. With examples if needed"
How generous of you, given your record for very lengthy posts,
to offer me a few words! ( I am still enjoying the humour options).
Actually referrences like the one Marq gave us on the bankers and the Great Depression are good background and as I said recently the conditioning that goes on daily from politicians and economists and the media like a dripping tap has to be de-spun
otherwise much of what is said is meaningless. Like much of what I have said to date on the same subject can sound
as MarQ received it, hoity and bigoted or doesn't register.

I am currently debating "money" with Pliny on the thread about
The efficiency of Capitalism being curse. We both ubnderstand
how evil and fraudulent the money system is but we are very different about how to fix it. This is because it is such a huge and subtle subject and the language and perspectives used varies with different people which makes it more complex.
However I will try and put a few things together and try and be practical regards a better way (and there are many ways to skin a cat.)

Here is a challenge Marq in return, in good humour.
"If a child cannot do simple multiplication like 2x4 where does the problem lie, in the child or the equation?"
Being outside the law of the excluded middle (two options) I
have to say the problem lies with the teacher.
  • 0

#1283 MarquisDeSade

MarquisDeSade

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 59 posts

Posted 14 October 2003 - 02:48 PM

Hi bader, as true as the hairs growing on you, you are a bigot. a bigot will never see the true problem of a problem. something to quote from you, "you are fixated with money".


i will keep this short and simple for less confusion. i agree that money equals to power. Have you ever realise what leads individual to crave for power?


for your dedication to the subject, i salute you. as im very new to the subject of banks, economy and the financial systems.


"Here is a challenge Marq in return, in good humour.
"If a child cannot do simple multiplication like 2x4 where does the problem lie, in the child or the equation?"
Being outside the law of the excluded middle (two options) I
have to say the problem lies with the teacher."

intelligence is made for proper and good uses. please dont abuse it. the question above mentioned is the answer. hint: it's more than meet the eyes.


sade
  • 0

#1284 donquijote

donquijote

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3919 posts

Posted 14 October 2003 - 05:47 PM

<Hi donq, most of your replies are flawed and alluding. you arent getting straight to the point for that matter. it's either you dont understand what im saying or simply brushing it aside. this is the reason for my absence. i must say this is a really good thread. thumbs up for starting it. however, thumbs down for allusion. like the example i gave bader,and i think it would apply to you too : if a child cant do a simple mathematic equation of 2 times 4, where does the problem lies? the equation or the child? >

Howdy Marquis
I know my answers must not be perfect--and thereby "flawed"--but take into account that I write for a larger audience as well (like my last post, in which I was *not* responding to you).

As a matter of fact I try to stick to the mathematical precision of 2+2=4 but *there's no single fit-all solution*. And kibbutz ain't solution for all just as capitalism ain't a solution for all. The way it is though you are forced to drink from the lion's dirty waterhole.

Once and again, what I'm proposing is *OPTIONS*. Options to compete or cooperate, where they count, not the option between 'Fox A' and 'Fox B' as it is the case in "democracy."

<i do agree with your proposal of the kibbutz(smaller scale of communism), and as a matter of fact, i like it too. i seriously do. the reason for my proposal of system lead by a leader is because of the different characters and capabilities of mankind. communism is too idealistic. it needs a mature individual to be able to comprehend the system. an exampple, how many of that individuals in a 20million population are capable of doing it? im not pessimistic but realistic. maybe one day, when the lion has become extinct, the small animals will not have anything to be afraid of. But, what about the other predators?>

As we speak millions may want to cooperate but can't do so. They better kill or be killed. There are lions and there are ants. And many--check the kibbutz forum above--are looking to volunteer even though--make no mistake about it--they are a Jewish enterprise, meant for Jews...;)

<quote "the socialists are becoming democratic. why? because majority(capitalists) wins.">

In lack of real options, elections are bought so big bucks win. And in the most powerful 'democracy' in the world, half the people don't even care to vote. If they were given real options--like the ones presented here--there's no doubt in my mind who they would vote for...

<now, in the first place, who is in the lie or lying?>

The lion is...;)
  • 0

#1285 donquijote

donquijote

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3919 posts

Posted 14 October 2003 - 06:00 PM

"Can you please, Bader, bring it forth ina few words. With examples if needed"

<How generous of you, given your record for very lengthy posts,
to offer me a few words! ( I am still enjoying the humour options).>

Howdy Bader
No, I mean, you've been most enlightening but perhaps you can sum it up in a paragraph for the benefit for all. Or perhaps a favorite article of yours...;) Otherwise I'd say you don't disagree with me in substance. After all I do make a *democratic solution* as you like it...;)
  • 0

#1286 donquijote

donquijote

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3919 posts

Posted 14 October 2003 - 06:22 PM

<I don't disagree that we have to keep a vigilant watch on factors that may lead to our demise. That is not arguable.

How much, though, of what we hear, is rhetoric. Fear mongering to cower the populace and demand big brother step in.>

OK, let me put it another way: The Earth is a closed system, right? You know what it means, like the s*** you put in ain't going nowhere. And you say, "Yeah but is a *large* closed system." And I go, "It's like your house, you throw all the s*** around and eventually the plumbing gets clogged up and the s*** is plainly lying around." And you go, "Yeah but there's no evidence that that's killing me." And I reply, "But by the time *your children* grow up the house will be full of s***." And you say, "You provide me with proof that s*** is bad and then I'll clean up my act."

And I finally go, "You win, my friend, don't worry be happy!";)
  • 0

#1287 donquijote

donquijote

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3919 posts

Posted 15 October 2003 - 01:06 AM

<Actually, the Earth is not a closed system. There's something called "The rest of the universe" that is not included in the Earth system. We can, and eventually will, use the emptiness of space as a never-ending toxic waste dump site.

In the interim, however, we reap directly what we sow.>

Howdy Beat
We are in the infancy of intergalactic garbage disposal--just a satellite here and there. But, judging by what we are doing back on Earth, that may just be the next frontier of capitalism...;)

"We did not inherit the earth from our ancestors - we borrow it from our children"

"We are living on this planet as if we had another one to go to."
- Terri Swearingen

The Problem With Garbage
'Garbage is a serious problem in virtually all areas of the world where people buy and use modern consumer goods. Garbage is a concern for many reasons. Some of these are the space it takes up in landfills, the problems with finding a "safe" desposal site that will not harm the surrounding environment, wildlife and people. Once a site has been used as a landfill it cannot (or should not) be used for other purposes due to potential toxicity.What we throw away every day in the trash does not disappear when the trashmen haul it away, it accumulates in great deposits that are now geologic in proportion! Depending on the items they may remain for centuries, or millenia.

Human beings are the only creatures on this planet that are this wasteful, and no other creature pollutes their environment around them to the point of causing their own illness or death, as we so often do. For those who believe in evolution the reason for that is obvious - an organism who pollutes their own environment, harming themselves in the process, would have not been highly favored in the process of natural selection.'

http://www.environme...om/garbage.html
  • 0

#1288 MarquisDeSade

MarquisDeSade

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 59 posts

Posted 15 October 2003 - 05:19 AM

"Howdy Marquis
I know my answers must not be perfect--and thereby "flawed"--but take into account that I write for a larger audience as well (like my last post, in which I was *not* responding to you)."

Hi donq, again and again, arent you good with excuses. defintely there will not be any answers you gave to be perfect. if you make a view(your answer), you have to defend it. you totally caught me off guard here. you are not responding to me. that is really strange. the first two words you type in the previous post was "howdy marquis", what does this mean? arent we exchanging views, both of us?


"As a matter of fact I try to stick to the mathematical precision of 2+2=4 but *there's no single fit-all solution*. And kibbutz ain't solution for all just as capitalism ain't a solution for all. The way it is though you are forced to drink from the lion's dirty waterhole."

is 2+2 not equals to 4? i gave you a straight-forward question.


<i do agree with your proposal of the kibbutz(smaller scale of communism), and as a matter of fact, i like it too. i seriously do. the reason for my proposal of system lead by a leader is because of the different characters and capabilities of mankind. communism is too idealistic. it needs a mature individual to be able to comprehend the system. an exampple, how many of that individuals in a 20million population are capable of doing it? im not pessimistic but realistic. maybe one day, when the lion has become extinct, the small animals will not have anything to be afraid of. But, what about the other predators?>

"As we speak millions may want to cooperate but can't do so. They better kill or be killed. There are lions and there are ants. And many--check the kibbutz forum above--are looking to volunteer even though--make no mistake about it--they are a Jewish enterprise, meant for Jews...;)"

irrelevant. what are talking about? did you read my questions properly? i dont care if it's meant for jew or not. i was asking,"what about the other predators, which are tiger, leopard.."


<quote "the socialists are becoming democratic. why? because majority(capitalists) wins.">

"In lack of real options, elections are bought so big bucks win. And in the most powerful 'democracy' in the world, half the people don't even care to vote. If they were given real options--like the ones presented here--there's no doubt in my mind who they would vote for..."

seriously, i do not think they lack options. are you implying that there arent intelligent people within the election parties.


<now, in the first place, who is in the lie or lying?>

"The lion is...;)"

if the lion is lying, why arent anyone exposing his lie? so who is smarter here?


sade
  • 0

#1289 Bader

Bader

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1757 posts

Posted 15 October 2003 - 09:27 AM

Howdy DonQ and Marq and others,

I was only joking DonQ, I knew what you meant. Under the circunstances I preferred to make-light.

Regards the request for something concise regards the money issue, the post of Marq's with the web article is about a good as one could find in relation to its size and it supports much of what I have been saying for months.

I challenge anyone to find a bigger and more powerful Lion than what that article reveals. Even Marq saw what Animal Farm was realy about yet I have in the main had no response to what I have been saying. However I didn't get personal. ( I know DonQ you have been warming to it in the form of economic democracy)
I know that the Lie is so big and the public deeply conditioned I have become a bigot trying to expose the Lion's lie.
It s the most insidious and diabolical design for farming humans
and as the article said it comes from thousands of years back
from ancient Babylon, handed down through secret societies.
But you can lead some people to water (equation) but you can't make them drink (put things together). It takes time and
perseverance to get through (on their part). I have consistently qualified my position and supported much of what DonQ has said but the coop for example is no match for the substance of what that article describes. That is reality.

Have I ever realized what leads individuals to crave for power?
The truism that the love of money is the root of all evil is as
accurate as one can get. In the end the power of the money
is the greater.
The psychological and pychiatric options are many and many would offer a variety of answers. The point is the instrument for
obtaining and exercising power, hidden out in the open by a huge lie is what concerns us not the personal emotions or passions of the various lions which are common to man.

The article repeated what I have said (you can't do anything without money) when it said money is necessary above simple barter. So the challenge is if you want a society better than what we have around the world, you have no option but to reform the money system first, because whether there are intelligent people in govt or not there will not be better options made available in the establishment because moneypower will not "authorise" it. Those who don't heed the warnings end up dead. The Colonials in the New World were invaded by the British Forces, as the article explained, because the Bankers held a mortgage over the British.

If you want to know your enemy study that article and others like it.

In that article they advocate the right of all to a dividend which I also adhere to. That is more than people get for sweeping the streets in Curitiba and there they were given dignity while in other cities they are part of the trash in the streets. No one
needs to sweep the streets for a dividend ( you will find a common principle in this as in the coop, DonQ, that's why I have been stressing the principles).
Curitiba is better than what is common but it is not what it should be either.
This is one example of why I can't settle for less. There are many others including a twenty hour week ( better to have a dividend and a wage for sweeping the streets twenty hours a week, a
lower cost of living/higher standard, instead of a forty hour low wage only with taxes and interest and higher prices to be paid!). So I have a fixation, but people deserve better and I wont settle for less.

If I have fixation for exposing the Lion what would I be called if knowing but turning a blind eye and passing by on the otherside. (answer= a GOOD samaritan).
It can get gooder than good too.
You can be held to be a genius throughout the world if you know
the Lions means to power, not only turn a blind eye but devise an alternative enslaving system posing as opposition to the lion and promising liberation. KarL Marx.
  • 0

#1290 MarquisDeSade

MarquisDeSade

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 59 posts

Posted 15 October 2003 - 03:13 PM

Hi bader, it's really sad to see that you need to make light under such circumstances. this put your character under the light too.

as far as it is, you havnt even smell the root. you are really close, very close. power equals to money. true. BUT, money and power are separate issue. power is intangible, money is tangible. once there is no value in money, do you think there is still power? of course not. why would one go for something which is insignificant.

for thousands of years, this problem have not been solved. why? because we are making the same mistakes over and over again through the years. some say money is evil but who is the real devil? who created money? who uses money? it's us, human. we created and uses it. we,human, are flawed not money.

why are the pigs in animal farm in control? because they are greedy.

greed is man biggest sin. without greed, do one craves more ,in this case for power? it's all in the wrong side of the lane. that is why the world is in such a state.

the article didnt say money is the root of evil. if you read it carefully and ponder over. you shall see the true light. putting the blame on money is as good as shifting the blame on others.

what is wrong with the person sweeping in the streets? how insulting of you to him. is it so demeaning to sweep the roads? by virtue of nature, he is doing credit for our motherland. on what grounds can you demean such a person. he dont rob, dont steal, dont beg. does he not have dignity? how indignified of you to say such words. i spit at those words. what honours do you have.

the money system you propose is good but it is the mechanisms of the system. it's the part, not the engine, of the system.

if you have realised of the presence of this thread that left only the two of you who are running the show here. if it's good, where are the debates and discussions? this does mean something. and there are a lot that you still have not realise.

this thread is as big as the monster(ego). whoever state it's view. it's countered in a one sided manner. what is the point then? this is a very good example of why not all humans can work congenially.

ultimately, who runs the system? us. human, again. do we all share the views at this current point? no. why? cos we are different in many ways. i do not have to elaborate more.

help yourself first. it's beneficial both ways.

with power comes great responsiblities. therefore, power must lie in good hands. not everyone knows how to manage it.

please, please show some respect to people. it is the heart of the individual that counts, not the job.

with respect,

sade
  • 0

#1291 Bader

Bader

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1757 posts

Posted 16 October 2003 - 12:51 AM

Howdy Marq,

I return a salute to you for hanging in there being determined to
make a contribution to better things.

I offered those who are sweeping the streets a dividend on top of what you offer them and I would give them less hours for the same pay, where did I show less respect for them than you?

Whether the article said The Love of Money was the root of all
evil is not an issue. You asked me a question and I gave you an answer that is commonly known. Usually it is
mis-represented as money being the root of all evil which is not the same. The love of money relates to the love of power.
Money is an innocent pratical facilitator. Powerhungry people abuse it by monopoly.

On that issue I advocate reforming/redesigning the money system so it cant be an instrument to control. The powerhungry will go elsewhere to ply their skills. Why leave a weapon lying around to hurt people and look for someone nice to take charge
of a system that is based on the abuse of power? The temptation
to enjoy the power is a set up.
There is no doubt in my mind that we both want the same just and good end. We need both a good system (that attracts) the right sort of people and good leaders. We agree on that, so why the conflict, given that nothing happens without money?

You believe money is merely a part not the engine. I think you will find the article said it was the lifeblood. No lifeblood no engine noice, no action.
What is the engine in your view and what does it run on?

I realise that often there are only two of us "running" the thread.
Its an open forum. We join in on new points of interest people bring in. Who knows maybe we are the only ones reading it. People will shop around in an open "market". We call it
voting with your feet. Maybe nobody wants to talk about the Lion, Animal Farm, Curitiba, coops, money power and Kibbutz.

It would appear one sided when it is currently mainly DonQ and myself and we agree on alot. You might feel frustrated because
what you have to say isn't understood as you would like, I could say the same.

I agree that responsibility goes with power and few can handle it properly. That is one important reason I believe that power should be accountable and defused democratically as much as practical and unfortunately people in general don't want the responsibility of sharing power or exercising demands for
accountablility. There is a well know quote from Lord Aster
that power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely.
I put out a challenge to show me a bigger Lion than the money power. You haven't responded.
  • 0

#1292 donquijote

donquijote

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3919 posts

Posted 16 October 2003 - 01:41 AM

<Hi donq, again and again, arent you good with excuses. defintely there will not be any answers you gave to be perfect. if you make a view(your answer), you have to defend it. you totally caught me off guard here. you are not responding to me. that is really strange. the first two words you type in the previous post was "howdy marquis", what does this mean? arent we exchanging views, both of us?>

I ain't perfect but I'm damn good...;) Seriously I expected this to be nice and quite and fing some belligerance here. Well, let's get down to business.

When I talk to someone I do have in mind the 500 others who may be reading this debate, because naturally 500 is more important than 1--mathematically and democratically--and if it weren't I would be conducting this debate one on one. Bader and I agreed on *exposing the lion* and we're doing just fine...

"As a matter of fact I try to stick to the mathematical precision of 2+2=4 but *there's no single fit-all solution*. And kibbutz ain't solution for all just as capitalism ain't a solution for all. The way it is though you are forced to drink from the lion's dirty waterhole."

<is 2+2 not equals to 4? i gave you a straight-forward question.>

I thought you were into some arithmetics wich I never figured out.

<<i do agree with your proposal of the kibbutz(smaller scale of communism), and as a matter of fact, i like it too. i seriously do. the reason for my proposal of system lead by a leader is because of the different characters and capabilities of mankind. communism is too idealistic. it needs a mature individual to be able to comprehend the system. an exampple, how many of that individuals in a 20million population are capable of doing it? im not pessimistic but realistic. maybe one day, when the lion has become extinct, the small animals will not have anything to be afraid of. But, what about the other predators?>>

"As we speak millions may want to cooperate but can't do so. They better kill or be killed. There are lions and there are ants. And many--check the kibbutz forum above--are looking to volunteer even though--make no mistake about it--they are a Jewish enterprise, meant for Jews...;)"

<irrelevant. what are talking about? did you read my questions properly? i dont care if it's meant for jew or not. i was asking,"what about the other predators, which are tiger, leopard..">

Well I missed the last question but I did answer to your scepticism of "communism is too idealistic," which obviously doesn't apply to the kibbutz but to some other coercive system some called "communism" (the way the law of the jungle--set up for and by the lion--is called "democracy").

Now for the question:

Did you read my 'No Lion No Problem'? It means we always must be vigilant against the lion, *any lion*, otherwise I would have said a name of a particular lion--like for example some say, 'No Castro No Problem.' Once you have all--including kids--repeating that it's going to be mighty difficult for any predator to prey on them. At the same time you create 'lion-free territories'--like the coops, and the little animals should be able to be free, real free.

<<quote "the socialists are becoming democratic. why? because majority(capitalists) wins.">>

"In lack of real options, elections are bought so big bucks win. And in the most powerful 'democracy' in the world, half the people don't even care to vote. If they were given real options--like the ones presented here--there's no doubt in my mind who they would vote for..."

<seriously, i do not think they lack options. are you implying that there arent intelligent people within the election parties.>

Yeah, they are mighty intelligent, but perhaps not extremely 'honest.'

<<now, in the first place, who is in the lie or lying?>>

"The lion is...;)"

<if the lion is lying, why arent anyone exposing his lie? so who is smarter here?>

I'm sorry to break to you: most of the world is now aware to the fact of the lion. The Black Sheep just noticed first...;)

HOW THE BLACK SHEEP WERE EXPELLED

One day the Lion, who had been thinking how to best eat the sheep, decided to dress as a sheep... This way the sheep trusted the new "sheep" more and more every day, some confessing to him, others voting for him, and most allowing to be trimmed by him...

Meanwhile, the Black Sheep thought this way: "If he got paws and big teeth and roars, lion he is..."

And that's the reason why from then on the Black Sheep weren't allowed to mingle anymore with the simple and common sheep...
  • 0

#1293 donquijote

donquijote

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3919 posts

Posted 16 October 2003 - 02:15 AM

<Curitiba is better than what is common but it is not what it should be either.
This is one example of why I can't settle for less. There are many others including a twenty hour week ( better to have a dividend and a wage for sweeping the streets twenty hours a week, a
lower cost of living/higher standard, instead of a forty hour low wage only with taxes and interest and higher prices to be paid!). So I have a fixation, but people deserve better and I wont settle for less.>

Howdy Bader
Curitiba ain't perfect but it offers a different viewpoint of the city being at the center of change. I believe it's mighty important to change the city because no other place represents the jungle better. We can say that we fix the city the worst we can fix the world. Of course, we can do it better--I say in my proposal, "everything can be improved"--particularly if we have the whole population involved and the lion neutralized as it will be the case.

<If I have fixation for exposing the Lion what would I be called if knowing but turning a blind eye and passing by on the otherside.>

Once the lion is exposed he's often forced to change. For example, when I moved to my present address the backyard of the luxury condo next door and the street on one side was littered to the point of making me sick (it was outside their view however). I complained directly once and they did nothing. Only when I went on the Internet and exposed them they cleaned it up and it has remained that way ever since. We can change the world, just expose the lion...;)
  • 0

#1294 donquijote

donquijote

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3919 posts

Posted 16 October 2003 - 03:16 AM

<as far as it is, you havnt even smell the root. you are really close, very close. power equals to money. true. BUT, money and power are separate issue. power is intangible, money is tangible. once there is no value in money, do you think there is still power? of course not. why would one go for something which is insignificant.

for thousands of years, this problem have not been solved. why? because we are making the same mistakes over and over again through the years. some say money is evil but who is the real devil? who created money? who uses money? it's us, human. we created and uses it. we,human, are flawed not money.>

I don't buy that. Not all animals are hungre and stupid. Some of us run the jungle, and the jungle make us all bad. Why? Because in the jungle you better 'kill or be killed,' that's why. A few lions f*** up the rest. That's why the rest better bring the lion under control.

However the lion doesn't want cooperation in the jungle, and the lion doesn't want competition in the jungle. That's why what's known as "capitalism" is no more than big corporations running the jungle.

LESSON #1

***COOPERATION IS BETTER THAN COMPETITION AND COMPETITION IS BETTER THAN THE LAW OF THE JUNGLE WHERE THE LION IS IN CHARGE***

<why are the pigs in animal farm in control? because they are greedy.>

Because the greedy ones rise to power. But why aren't the pigs in control in the kibbutz? Because they know better than try to mess with the organized, cooperative little animals.

LESSON #2

***THE COOPERATIVE LITTLE ANIMALS GIVE A S*** ABOUT GREED AND POWER***

<what is wrong with the person sweeping in the streets? how insulting of you to him. is it so demeaning to sweep the roads? by virtue of nature, he is doing credit for our motherland. on what grounds can you demean such a person. he dont rob, dont steal, dont beg. does he not have dignity? how indignified of you to say such words. i spit at those words. what honours do you have.>

Harsh words. I didn't even notice he was demeaning to them or perhaps he was. I guess Bader can explain. But spitting on his words is a tad too much and I may say that you saying that we humans are flawed and greedy as a whole is kind of harsh too.

<if you have realised of the presence of this thread that left only the two of you who are running the show here. if it's good, where are the debates and discussions? this does mean something. and there are a lot that you still have not realise. >

It only means that we are already #1, even before Russia herself becomes #1...;)

we are even saying things many would only dare to whisper. And while some are wasting their time in bickering and repeating the official line we made this debate #1, and we give it to the Russian people and to all who may find some relief in truth.

<this thread is as big as the monster(ego). whoever state it's view. it's countered in a one sided manner. what is the point then? this is a very good example of why not all humans can work congenially. >

The lions are the ones that get an ego trip, and that's why they need power and luxuries and SUVs and yachts. But others don't need it for they know that fame is quite stupid and spoils one's lives. They are the ones who believe in the pleasure of simple life and freedom.

LESSON #3

***LIONS NEED BIG EGO, LITTLE ANIMALS NEED NO BIG EGO***

<ultimately, who runs the system? us. human, again. do we all share the views at this current point? no. why? cos we are different in many ways. i do not have to elaborate more.

help yourself first. it's beneficial both ways. >

If it was humans as whole it would be democracy and that would quite good. The problem however is, I repeat, the lion...
  • 0

#1295 donquijote

donquijote

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3919 posts

Posted 16 October 2003 - 04:26 AM

It seems to me the lion keeps the lion share, doesn't he?

look how cute...;)


  • 0

#1296 MarquisDeSade

MarquisDeSade

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 59 posts

Posted 16 October 2003 - 05:02 AM

Hi donq, you sound angry dont you. dont be. keep cool. this is life. it's human nature to be so, just like the laws of jungle.

firstly, i would like to thank you for the informations you provided. they are really good and productive. i learned a lot from it. im too lazy to search for them, so you are helpful.

secondly, like your insistence of your cooperatives. i still stand on my grounds. i know i sound harsh but it's fact, truth. truth is never pleasant and especially of criticisms on one's characters. human tends to repel such comments. we are afraid to know our faults.

lastly, you and bader seriously need to reflect upon yourself. both of you dont even understand yourself. escapists. you never see the true light. one day,when i dont see this thread anymore. i presume both you have seen the light. light of the laws of nature. no one wins in nature. it's cycle. how can anyone come out top? only morons do.

Yours sincerely,

sade
  • 0

#1297 MarquisDeSade

MarquisDeSade

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 59 posts

Posted 16 October 2003 - 11:13 AM

Hi bader, i admit my mistake for misinterpretation of the sentences on the road sweeper. i apologised.

a balanced money system would create a fairer environment. true. however, all it takes is a few corrupted one to turn it all around. it's always been a battle between the good and bad. this is a fact. this is human nature.

i am quite sure that you said the root of all evil is money. it's written in your previous post,prior to this. read back. you are very inconsistent. yes, it's true that money is the bloodline in the article. i did it on purpose to provoke. this is my nature.

i have made my respond in the previous reply to you, and you still dont get it. greed is the root of all evil. this is the character that needs to be curb. therefore, this characteristic should be subdue or eradicated. however, this is part of nature. how can the law of nature be strike off?

the world can be improve im many ways. some prefer it this way, some the other.

this thread can go as long as it wants, till the day you die even. so long it's virtual, i see no point. i would like to see the system you propose one day. i still have long way to go.
you may say of people window shopping, passer-by and blah blah blah....if it's still inside the store, it will never see the light of the day.

remember, i didnt try to convince you of mine. i shared and you disagreed. in such a case, how can a coop work in a greater scale? this is for both of you to discuss till the sun rise from the north.

sade
  • 0

#1298 donquijote

donquijote

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3919 posts

Posted 17 October 2003 - 12:21 AM

Hi Bader, all
This book, the 'Soul of Capitalism' proves us right. The Lion is in control, and the keys to a solution are shared ownership of the 'water well'--coops, etc--and...finances, ie the use of the little people's pension funds to tame the lion. Though, Bader, I think the latter may be an overkill. Probably the construction of the water well will bring the lion back under control. What do you think?

(I will be going back to this book)

'The magic word -- the touchstone in capitalism -- is ownership. Insiders have always understood that controlling ownership involves accepting risk and responsibility for the enterprise and its outcomes -- thereby claiming ownership of its entire profits and deciding who gets what share of the returns. Most people are cut out of that process, consigned to passive roles as supplicants, without influence and often without even a way to question the decisions. This arrangement is, likewise, a great engine of inequality in our society. It is one of the reasons why no amount of government assistance ever overcomes the gross and growing inequalities generated by the economic system.

Little by little, in myriad ways, Americans are figuring out that it doesn't have to be this way. Nothing in the fundamentals of capitalism requires a very steep pyramid of power or the malignant maldistribution of wealth and incomes. And the system demonstrably would work more effectively if these concentrations of wealth and power were gradually unwound.

Changing the standard arrangements is most difficult, of course, but as people examine the possibilities they discover that collectively the broad ranks of working Americans actually have enormous assets on their side. Indeed, despite vast inequalities in personal wealth, the broad stock market -- 60 percent of the 1,000 largest corporations -- belongs to the ordinary Americans, through their pension funds and the other fiduciary institutions holding their savings.

The greatest names in industry and finance draw upon this "collectivized wealth" for their capital. Why, we may ask, is this capital passively aligned with the business values that regularly do great damage to the very people who own the wealth? These are the kind of deeper questions this country needs to explore and I hope my book helps stimulate contentious conversations. In fact, I assert that people have the potential to exercize decisive influence within the system in behalf of deep reforms, once they learn to recognize where their pressure points are located. Some dream expansively of transforming American capitalism from the bottom up.'

more...

http://williamgreider.com/
  • 0

#1299 donquijote

donquijote

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3919 posts

Posted 17 October 2003 - 05:31 PM

<lastly, you and bader seriously need to reflect upon yourself. both of you dont even understand yourself. escapists. you never see the true light. one day,when i dont see this thread anymore. i presume both you have seen the light. light of the laws of nature. no one wins in nature. it's cycle. how can anyone come out top? only morons do.>

I may not be sure who may come on top of this thread, but I'm sure who will remain at the bottom: the little people, or little animals or proles. Nevertheless I feel proud to have invested so much time into this--and I'm sure Bader does too. One important thing, at least the little people *now* have a way out, actually more than one. Perhaps if Marx had been questioned the way we have half the world wouldn't have suffered so much under State Capitalism, aka Communism...

I don't know where you live but you'll probably recognize the lion that one way or another eats you everyday at the workplace and that even threatens our own survival...

'Yes, we are fabulously wealthy as a nation, but are we truly free? How can people be considered free when their daily lives are so closely regimented by the confinements imposed upon them at work, rules that tell them to turn off their brains and take orders, no back talk? The content and conditions of work for most Americans -- even in well-salaried positions -- are determined from above by a steep pyramid of distant managers, who are often brutally indifferent to the human consequences or even to what the employees know about how the company functions (and malfunctions). These confining circumstances, once associated with the assembly line, have crept very far up the job ladder.

Indeed, the satisfactions inherent in doing a good job -- intangible qualities of human fulfillment enjoyed by conscientious workers at every level -- have been steadily degraded in recent decades, even for many high-skilled professionals. Lots of Americans understand this has occurred. Why then does the subject remain taboo for politics? Because any serious political inquiry could not get very far without running up against the reigning operating values and power structure of business enterprise. *When political leaders someday find the courage to talk forthrightly about the "politics of work," then we will know the country is on the road to reinventing capitalism*.

My book poses such heretical questions across the main realms of the economic system -- work, capital investing, consumption and production, the corporation as principal form of business organization and the government as leading patron and protector of capitalist enterprise.

How can shareholders be celebrated as the "owners" of a corporation when they are utterly powerless to influence the insiders who control business strategies, who decide whether to discard social obligations or even to destroy the company itself?

Why are consumers said to be "king" when they have been safely insulated from the social consequences of what they buy and how it is made, distanced from any responsible influence?

Where is the economic logic of government subsidizing business sectors that improve their profitability by destroying nature or dumping other collateral costs on the public at the large?

The American system is rich in such contradictions. I explore them, looking for points of leverage. *Despite honorable exceptions, most economists are not much interested in these questions* [here Bader and I became interested]. The orthodox perspective treats these matters as non-economic "social concerns," not relevant to the company's search for "efficiency" or the managerial techniques needed to maximize output and returns. But people care about them, so do communities. One way or another, they are rebelling in unheralded ways against the narrow-minded accounting that can put a price on everything, but fails to value all that people regard as priceless.'

http://williamgreider.com/
  • 0

#1300 donquijote

donquijote

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3919 posts

Posted 17 October 2003 - 05:46 PM

<a balanced money system would create a fairer environment. true. however, all it takes is a few corrupted one to turn it all around. it's always been a battle between the good and bad. this is a fact. this is human nature.>

That ain't human nature, that's *lion nature*. The problem is they are in charge and unless we tame them they'll eat us, as simple as that...

<i have made my respond in the previous reply to you, and you still dont get it. greed is the root of all evil. this is the character that needs to be curb. therefore, this characteristic should be subdue or eradicated. however, this is part of nature. how can the law of nature be strike off?>

The are two laws of nature: the law of competition and the law of cooperation. The problem is now the laws are set up by and for the lion toward competition--or more properly said toward 'monopoly' where he's in charge--and that's our curse...

Competition, Cooperation or Both?

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

Are we to learn something from evolution? Well, it would probably be that both Competition and Cooperation are necessary... Thus only a balance of the two (which neither communism nor capitalism offers) can constitute a stable political system... This interesting article illustrates the point...

Spectrum Five: Competition vs. Cooperation

Summary
'Humans, like all animals, form cooperative groups to compete for limited
resources. All life is ultimately competitive, because the natural
tendency of any population is to explode, although it is kept in check
by the limited food supply (and other factors). Because there are more
animals than food, animals must compete to survive. In situations where
the food supply is somehow sufficient, deadly competition falls.
Liberals therefore advocate the creation of a sustainable economy, where
the population is kept constant (through birth control) and resources
are used no faster than they can be replaced. The result will be a more
cooperative and civil society.
Argument
In the debate over what type of society is best, conservatives generally
favor more competitive societies, whereas liberals favor more
cooperative ones. Let's attempt to see which side is correct, by
reviewing the fundamentals of competition and cooperation...'

(snip)

'The solution that leftists propose is the creation of a sustainable
economy. This would involve holding the population constant through
birth control [not at all, education can do the job], and using resources no faster than they could be
replaced. We would then use our abundance and technology to allow
everyone a good standard of living. There would be no need to compete
for survival, and no need to kill anyone to survive. This would tilt the
balance towards cooperation, not competition. Critics charge that humans
are naturally competitive animals -- after all, they evolved that way.
To create a perfectly cooperative society, they charge, is both
impossible and utopian. This is certainly true, but fortunately, there
is a way around it. Competition for survival is only one of the many
thousands of ways that humans compete. Humans also fulfill their desire
to compete through games, sports, contests, social status, career
status, academic status, even mating. Eliminating the need to compete
for survival would hardly eliminate the countless other ways that humans
compete. Competition could still be used to improve society, even a
sustainable one.'

http://webspawner.co...rs/donquijote14
  • 0




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Copyright © 2016 Pravda.Ru