You would call the 3000 deaths on September 11 murder, would you not?
Half of this world you live in would call them justified deaths as part of a war America started. The same half of the world refers to each and every death (military and civilian) in Iraq and Afghanistan as murder. They see (and it has been made painfully clear) that America is an occupying force (Iraq) or, again, cutting them loose (Afghanistan).

Don't worry that point I do agree with, and I do have an Economics degree so should not be completely clueless on economics. The idea that cycles are without cause though was what i was questioning.

Sorry, Blue.

Got carried away......

ahem

I think the lawsuit against Take Two is wrong.

Luck my ass.

Baring illness, all it takes is the will to succeed here in America. That sounds like the typical pussy bithcing of a failure. No damn luck got me what I have. Luck is not a factor in success. Hard work and drive are. It is kinda sad that you think you can't be a success without some luck. I failed more times than I can remember before I got anywhere. And, if I fail again, I will pick my ass up and start back to work.

Pity. Why even try, then?

And, I probably give more to charities than you. It is not selfishness to expect an able-bodied person to support his/herself throughout their life. Our "support" programs are not limited. There is no incentive to better yourself. In fact, our poor in Amrica have a better lifestyle than practically the whole population of the planet. Why put in hard work if you are satisfied with the basics? Many are satisfied with that here in America. And, the basics for us are color television, air conditioning, dry room to sleep in. They live their whole lives on the dole and never better themselves. Maybe they think their luck is bad.

I am not for starving anyone. But, I am not for supporting people who are perfectly capable of supporting themselves. This is a huge problem in this country and not isolated to a very few instances. Many of our elderly subsist only through governement funding. Many more need no such help yet take their checks every month. Who wouldn't? Providing for your future is becoming a lost art.

There are other problems as well. Cost of living increases in Social Security has bankrupted the program. It hasn't (and will not) pay for itself in decades. With inflation, the elderly recieve much more than they put in. That would be fine if their original investment had accrued interest somewhere. But, that is not the case. All moneys collected for SS go into the general fund and gets spent on other crap. Our system is broken. We will see it come to a head in our lifetimes. Soon, actually. The Baby Boomers are just now starting to recieve benefits. Wait another 10-15 years and see how well the Medicaid/Medicare/Prescription drug bill has done then.


And, once again, luck my ass. That's pretty damn insulting to everybody who works hard for what they get. It might make YOU feel better to think they are "lucky", but the reality is that they want it and are willing to work for it.

It's a sign of a civilised society that the richest members help out those that are poor. The idea that all it takes in America to get rich is hard work is just fucking nonsense, you need luck. Example: a guy working hard as he can for Boeing. September 11th, fall in demand in his industry, massive layoffs, he gets unlucky. Out of his hands, he's on the dole.
That could happen to you Inkswitch. God forbid, but your business could go down the pan, you could get fired, you could just be too ill to work. And if that ever happens (as it has to many people) then you'll be damn glad you live in a country that is civilised enough to recognise that sometimes people need help.
Yes there are problems of benefit fraudsters. When you provide something for free, people over-use it - another well known economic problem (google for "free rider problem" if youre interested.) But the principles behind benefits are quite simply what I said above - sometimes people need help.
What do I call a health service? A way of ensuring that when those who can't afford healthcare get it. It's that simple. Now think about what it really means to take that away. And try to look beyond your own pocket. If you can't give up what you have to in taxes to provide for those less fortunate without bitching about it, you really don't deserve to live in a country as full of opportunity as America.
Incidentally, you brought up FDR's New Deal in the 30's. I'm not sure how much you know of economic history, but the reason the great crash ever came about was because of inadequate safeguards against economic growth under the government in the 20s. Believe it or not there is such a thing as too much growth - too low taxes, too few regulations on banks and private capital and investment. It brought huge growth, I admit. But huge suffering afterwards. That being said, the overall effect of the New Deal is questionable - further evidence that taxes and spending do not have an huge effect on the economy.
With respect for your political opinions, (and I am determined not to form an opinion as far as Republics vs Democrats), at least by listening to Joe and Moog I am reassured that America isn't full of selfish assholes.

Moog, you dug your own grave with that last rambling piece of nonsense. The most humane war fought in history and you call the unfortunate civilian casulaties "murder".


Joe, on the other hand, argues his views reasonably.
But, he is still wrong.

We can argue the war (VN) all day. I don't think there is a liberal conspiracy, really. I think that the sensationalism that is today's news leans itself towards the left. I think this is more of an economic impact than a complicated plan. They need to sell advertising. Bad news always sells more advertising than good news. Liberals tend to see things pessimistically. These adjendas are just natural partners..

The Afghanastan war... I didn't see what you saw. I saw the left decrying any offensive action. Just like now. Bush absolutely made it clear we were going after any government that we considered an immediate threat. The attack on the Trade Center changed the threat factor. It was now obvious that America could be hurt by that type of attack. It was imperitive that we eliminate any such entity that was capable of supporting such an attack. We are doing that now. We will handle Syria and Iran in time. Lybia and the rest of them are coming around.

You don't redistribute my wealth!?? Are you nuts? What do you call welfare? What do you call Social Security? What do you call Medicade or Medicare? Prescription Drug Act?(Bush on that one. He screwed his constituants over) ALL of those things are socialist/communist principals. It is relieving people of their civil responsibilities and spreading the burden over the populace. These are basic principles of communism. You are taking MY money and giving it to someone else. It matters not if it is in the form of drugs or medical care. It is still my money. My only fiscal responsibility should be for roads, military, and any other public infrastructure. That's not uncaring, it's practical.

Nobody starves in the streets in America. Nobody would starve in the street if we eliminated welfare. We DO take care of people. But, there is a difference between a helping hand and supporting them.

And, you are totally wrong about the abuses in the system. Women have babies just for the extra money they get for support. This is well documented and if you don't believe me, just run down to your local slum and start asking questions. You are gonna be surprised at their honesty in bilking the tax payers.

Funny, all these people who need work and government support, yet we need to let the illegal aliens in to work jobs Americans won't do. Hmmmmmm

This comment was edited on Jan 8, 18:07.

I don't mean to imply that civilinas were the target, but they died nonetheless. In some cases, like the dropping of cluster bombs onto civilian areas, a lot could have been done to prevent those deaths. They didn't target them intentionally, but they didn't exactly do all they could to protect them... and Depleted Uranium is another bag of nuts. I find self control hard to excercise when faced with a brickwit like Inkswitch.
As far as greed motivation goes... look at the amount of money firms directly related to the current administration is making. Look at the staunch protection of Oil fields. To me, there is way too much evidence to support a greed motivated war. Also, how was Saddam the next best thing? He has had nothing to do with international terror, other than local wars (war isn't terror, just ask Bush :)), and his weapons were documented as destroyed by scott ritter in 93 or 94 I believe... Point is, Saddam was no danger whatsoever to any American, until GWB sent them their to wage war.

This comment was edited on Jan 8, 17:50.

I'm going to have to step in here too Moog.

At least 7,900 civilians have died in Iraq alone, over three thousand in Afghanistan

That is tragic but we (US) arn't targeting them.

These murders were motivated by the greed of your government

I don't think its greed. Afgahnistan was motiviated by the harbouring of terrorists. Iraq was motivated because we still hadn't caught the main target in Afgahnistan so we went for the next best thing which was Saddam. Personally I think Iraq could have waited or really should have been taken care of in 1991 the first time around. Thank Bush 41 for that.

American army units involved in the killing of babies: Air Force, Marines, Navy, NAtional Guard, and Reserves - all simply by using shock and awe in Iraq, and to a lesser extent, Afghanistan

We don't target civilians. Your making generalizations much like Isnk based of rumor not fact.

I don't know about colonies created by the USA of late, but it isn't like Milosevic was invading Iraq, and colonizing it... he kept his murder domestic. Guam, anyone? Or, how about Noriega who was a CIA operative, and president of Panama? Hmm... American running another country with American's interests at the forefront... sounds like a colony to me, and thousands of Panamanians have died due to even more American interference there since Noriega's removal by Bush the first.

We have made some mistakes in the past that have caused some of our current problems, but as I said before we don't kill civilians on purpose and we havn't colonized in since the Spanish-American War.

Belive me i'm not fan of the bushies or the Xenophobes in the US either. But your starting to act just as bad as they are.

I can easily say such a thing. You decry the slaughter in Kosovo as totally unacceptable - why? the 10,000 racially motivated murders? At least 7,900 civilians have died in Iraq alone, over three thousand in Afghanistan. These murders were motivated by the greed of your government. Which is worse? Murder for money, or murder for racial differences? Murder is murder, and the race your government is exterminating is the human race. Most of those humans happen to have brown skin, but that is coincidence (again, no mention of White Supremecist Christian terrorists homegrown in the USA... why?). American army units involved in the killing of babies: Air Force, Marines, Navy, NAtional Guard, and Reserves - all simply by using shock and awe in Iraq, and to a lesser extent, Afghanistan. The Depleted Uranium shells they are vaporizing all over the world have two major health effects: Cancer, and birth defects - often inoperable, especially in countries like Iraq, and Afghanistan, where the "shock and awe" destroyed many hospitals, and decimated the ability of medical professionals in those countries to use what little facilities remain standing.
I don't know about colonies created by the USA of late, but it isn't like Milosevic was invading Iraq, and colonizing it... he kept his murder domestic. Guam, anyone? Or, how about Noriega who was a CIA operative, and president of Panama? Hmm... American running another country with American's interests at the forefront... sounds like a colony to me, and thousands of Panamanians have died due to even more American interference there since Noriega's removal by Bush the first. Iraq is a colony currently as well, and with 200000+ troops stationed (read living)there, an American in control of Iraq, again running the country for America...
I would be out of my mind if I made up facts and tried to argue with them, like "No children at all, go starving in the USA", or perhaps "There is absolutely no evidence whatsoever that homosexuality if biological", or even "our whole way of life threatens the hard-liners of the midle east", or "We helped Saddam to power. We helped him overthrow a communist government (the government in Iraq before ba'ath was a monarchy)" or "We sold weapons to Saddam to fight another enemy of ours: Iran. Are you implying that America is responsible for the deaths of those 400,000 people by supplying the weapons? (no guns = no deaths!)" or "Letting anybody marry would collapse the whole point of marriage as a concept" or "Just your statement that G. Bush (1st) AUTHORIZED the gassing of the Kurds makes anything else you say moot. You are an idiot if you think that Bush authorized that. Even stating something like that shows your stupidity and hatred" or "The best economy in two decades" or "At least he is handling the war magnificently" or "But, if you let same-sex marirages happen, clever straight people will marry each other to receive insurance, tax, and benefits meant for a child bearing family."
you said all of those things... all untrue. Who is nuts?

This comment was edited on Jan 8, 17:34.

Yes. Sympathy died because of the extreme anti-war faction aided by the then-emerging leftwing press. Guess they felt it was better for the S. Vietnamese to be treated like animals.

No, Sympathy didn't die because of some leftwing Jewish media conspiracy that people seem to blame for popular opinion, it died because of the Money, Equipment, time and lives. People didn't want to their sons to get drafted for a war that was going nowhere. That’s why.

Afghanastan. Small group of people my ass. The left was totally against any action in the mideast. That is absurd. It will be funny to see how many liberals say they supported the Iraq invasion after that country has becaome a vibrant, free country.

There you go again with the "Left wing" this and the "Left wing" that. As I saw it, the people who were against the war were a SMALL group of one issue people like there always have been. Iraq most of the country as well as some rightists were against it. I guess 50 percent of the country is Liberal then?

America is about being self reliant and independent. It's funny that you can't see that these are Marxists institutions and will inevitably fail. Most likely with dire consequences for the US. Ironic how we are defeating communism only to have the same concepts under a different name spring up here.

Wow there, Put down the Militia manual and come back to earth. Marxists Institutions?! We don’t redistribute your wealth. If you want to talk about welfare what about corporate welfare huh? What about their tax exemptions. Sure there is abuse of the SS system but its a needed system that I'm glad we have. It keeps the seniors who pay into it from worrying about how to pay the bills when they are 80. Its also what separates us from countries like Iran. We take care of our people so the streets aren’t littered. Contrary to belief there are restrictions, Nobody sits at home collecting welfare and food stamps and if that’s the case they don’t very long.

Let me take a guess, Joe...... Berkeley?

No sorry Erau and so you don't accuse me of being one of those "Anti-American Lefties", AFROTC Det 157.

This is my last comment on this. You need to learn not everything is part of some Communist plot to take over the world and “Liberals” aren’t some neo-communist threat to America. I don’t consider myself a liberal or conservative like most Americans. But when people start with the “Liberal Media Conspiracy” or the “Liberal Plot” it turns off people and makes whatever case you’re arguing seem less valid when you resort to name calling as apposed to facts.

See, Moog? That is exactly the idiotic type of thing that makes your points invalid.

How can you say such a thing? Who are we doing that to? Don't give me some roundabout shit cooked up by some liberal think tank. Who exactly are we killing? What races are we exterminating? Which American Army units are killing babies? What the hell are you thinking when you say that? What country have we made a colony?

Having different opinions on politics is one thing... Saying shit like that is another. You are out of your mind.

"We agree there. That type of activity by any government should be stopped at all costs. "
Your government is doing it right now.

Joe,

The "Libs" I refer to are the extreme fringe groups that constitute a large portion of the left.

Anti-war
Environmentalists
Anti-capitalism

etc.... The list goes on.

That "abortion" of a war ended after sympathy for the war died. Yes. Sympathy died because of the extreme anti-war faction aided by the then-emerging leftwing press. Guess they felt it was better for the S. Vietnamese to be treated like animals. These are the same people that demonstrated the soldiers upon returning from war calling them "baby killers" and other such nonsense.

After the depression and WWII, people were worried about their future. A MODEST social security plan was put into place. Since then, it has ballooned into a boondoggle. The system now is absolutely NOT what was intended upon inception. It has been abused by politicians ( R and D) for 50 years and it cannot stand under it's own weight. Soon, there will be a much larger percentage of retirees on the dole than there will be workers to support them. I wonder what will happen then?

Kosovo. Whatever the reason Clinton went in (wheather to deflect the legal problems he was having or not)..... I approve. We agree there. That type of activity by any government should be stopped at all costs.

Afghanastan. Small group of people my ass. The left was totally against any action in the mideast. That is absurd. It will be funny to see how many liberals say they supported the Iraq invasion after that country has becaome a vibrant, free country.

As for our socialist programs. YOU obviously don't know how the programs are abused in this country. Workman's comp, welfare, foodstamps, you name it. There are more able-bodied people on the dole than there are people who really deserve the help. There is more abuse and waste in that system than any other government program. Well, maybe Education......

America is about being self reliant and indepentant. It's funny that you can't see that these are Marxists institutions and will inevitaby fail. Most likely with dire consequences for the US. Ironic how we are defeating communism only to have the same concepts under a different name spring up here.

Let me take a guess, Joe...... Berkeley?

Yes very many. I consider myself a social liberal and fiscal conservative which most americans are Most of them don't get involved in politcal discussions like this. I usually don't but this guy doesn't seem to know his ass from a hole in the ground.


This comment was edited on Jan 8, 16:20.

JoeCool: Finally, a rational American... Are there any others?

Ok I just have to get involved with this because as an American I think its my duty to let people know not everyone in the USA is such a moron as Inkswitch.

As for freeing the rest of the oppressed people of the world. I am all for it. It's the Libs who pulled out of Viet Nam and started all this. They left those people hanging. It's that mentality that keeps us from helping others. The Libs didn't even want to retaliate after being attacked on our own soil. How are you gonna convince them to help other people when they won't even defend themselves. When it is even suggested, the anti-war faction comes to the fore and quashes it

Ok lets see... The first thing is you keep referring to a group of people called the "Libs" who seem to be what’s wrong with everything in this country. Kind of reminds me of Hitler and his constant mention of the Jews causing the problems, but that’s another argument.

First of all, Vietnam started during the Kennedy administration. That abortion of a war kept going during the failed Nixon administration and after 15 years and tens of thousands of dead Americans the troops were pulled out. Ford was president during that time and guess what *gasp* he was a republican. 80 percent of the country wanted that war to end and yes that included conservatives. So I don't know what "Libs" your talking about but most of American was united in getting out of there.

It's that mentality that keeps us from helping others

Yeah I guess FDR really didn't want to get rid of the Nazi's and Woodrow Wilson wanted Europe to be under German control too? Both of whom were founders of Modern "Liberalism" which by the sound of it you don't know what it is. Oh and I almost forgot, I guess Clinton really couldn't have cared less about the thousands of people being slaughtered in Kosovo and Bosnia? Read some books moron and you won't sound like such a fool.

The Libs didn't even want to retaliate after being attacked on our own soil. How are you gonna convince them to help other people when they won't even defend themselves

Third, the only people who were against the war in Afghanistan were a small band of people who are always against war no matter what. I would hardly paint all "Libs" like that, just like most people wouldn’t paint all conservatives as Racist Christen Fundamentalist Anti-Semites either because of a few David Dukes and Klan-type organizations.

I find it disgusting that I have to pay for foodstamps, welfare, and other costs for able-bodied people to sit on their asses without working when we have to go out of the country to find labor. The reason stated is that Americans won't take those jobs. This is true. Why would they take those jobs when they can make a better living by not working at all and watching TV all day?

I don't even want to touch that. You obviously don't know how the social programs in this country work.

Lastly, I'd like to apologize as a normal American who loves my country and what is was founded on to the people who have to read Inkswitch bull. But it is his right to sound like a Fascist Xenophobic Nationalist. Not all Americans are like him, most know a few things about History politics and government and aren't Limbaugh or Hannity Ditto Heads.

Inkswitch, I do not hate America, I am just educated about it's past, and I have noted, and learned from it's huge mistakes. Liberals caused the pull out from Vietnam with good reason, ie 4 million Vietnamese civilians being slaughtered by the American army might not put Average American Joe in the best light to the Billions of people in Asia.
Make no mistake, America is not the target of terrorists because they are "Big on the world stage". Israel is tiny potatoes, even compared to Canada, and they experience more "terror" than America and Canada combined. Palestine is even smaller, and Israel Army's terrorism has not ceased in that country for decades. This begs the question: Why, oh why would little Israel be such a piece of prey? Is it because they love freedom (they even erected a freedom fence!)? Is it because their women are allowed to walk unshrouded? Is it Anti-semitism? No, no, and no - Israel has preyed consistently on Palestinians for years, and in the process has made survival (food/water etc.) a challenge for them. Palestinians see this, and lo and behold, they attack Israel with all means available. Israel responds. America has assaulted the third world for the last sixty years with military, and covert operations, and in some cases - such as Afghanistan, stepped on the toes of someone who doesn't/didn't feel like taking it. Hence the attacks on America and it's interests globally, by non-Americans.
Canada, on the other hand, or, say, Mexico, who stay the fuck out of other countries political business, and mind their own, have not been attacked recently. Why? WHY????
Liberals, or at least the sane ones, do not want continuation of USAs global policy of interference for business interests (which both the intervention in Iraq, and Afghanistan have been about), and for damn good reasons: September 11 is the best reason (as those (politics for business) policies of days gone by CAUSEd sept11), and the worldwide poverty the USA has inflicted upon the people of the world is another.
Finally, I do worry about my own country - which is the reason, as a wealthy citizen, I am happy to pay taxes for welfare, medical care, and to guarantee members of my society at the very least, survival without insurmountable struggle. BUT I DONT GET ALL MY MONEY, I NEED IT ALL, I AM SO HARD DONE BY BY TAXES!! BOO HOO HOO!! I agree that much of Canada's prosperity has to do with America's, but none of my arguments have been "Down with USA", or "I hate the USA". I can see that the current state of affairs, that being: The stripping of personal Freedom, A president who defames members of his own government for being against him, a President who demands the unquestioning loyalty of his citizens (read serfs), extreme militarism, marriage of church and state, state control of media (didn't hear much about texas WMD plot on national news... I wonder why ), foreign policy geared towards making corporations a lot of money, constant propaganda (to the degree most Americans believe Saddam was responsible for sept 11, had WMDs, etc.), and scapegoating a religious group (Islam/Muslims) - has a scary definition. That defninition is Facsism. I do not, in any way, nor will I ever, be comfortable with, or not decry real life facsism in the country to my south - which happens to have enough nukes to destroy our species many times over.
You are all for freeing the oppressed people of the world? BULLSHIT. If you were, you would be telling your government to get the fuck out of occupied and oppressed Iraq, and would delve into the source of the oppression. Which oppression do you mean? The oppression of Shi'ites in Iraq? Oh yeah, a conservative hero (Bush, via April Gillespie's AOK for the whole thing) drowned their last attempt at autonomy in blood, killing 30,000 poeple (By the way, the Shi-ite rebellion I refer to would have ended Saddam's regime in 1990). The oppression of Iraqis before OPERATION IRAQI FREEDOM? I guess it can't be that, that was the USAs fault as well... oh well, only a million kids died from those oppre- I mean... "freedom" sanctions. Or maybe the oppression of women in Afghanistan? GWB and his conservatives really cleaned that one up for them... for about two days. Please, inform me about the oppression you are so opposed to and would like to end.
LAst thing this time: American companies did not move labor jobs out of the country for lack of employees, they did it to improve their bottom line. Millions of children employed by companies like: Wal-Mart, Coca-Cola, Nike, Reebok, (insert almost all American owned manufacturing companies here) can attest to this, while they earn a few pennies a day. Or, go to flint and find some laid off auto workers, and ask them what they do for a living now. You are so fucking clueless ...

This comment was edited on Jan 8, 16:08.

Mmm yeah slight mis-wording on my part there, you're right - obviously governments can affect the economy, and tax and spending (collectively known as fiscal policy) do so. My point is that fiscal policy is not a good method of controlling the "bigger picture." In terms of economic growth, tax cuts achieve little - it's fairly easy do demonstrate with diagrams. Just google for "natural rate of output" and it should show what I mean.

Moog,

Canada only has to spend 700 million on defense because you have the United States just to the south to defend you. Which we are happy to do. If you did not border the US, your country would be a very different place. Just keep riding our coat-tails and everything will be fine.

The reason you have had no terrorist attacks........
Well, Canada really isn't that important on the world stage. Sorry. I know that is gonna offend some folks. It is just that they take very little part in foreign policy. It is not an insult, just a fact.

As for freeing the rest of the oppressed people of the world. I am all for it. It's the Libs who pulled out of Viet Nam and started all this. They left those people hanging. It's that mentality that keeps us from helping others. The Libs didn't even want to retaliate after being attacked on our own soil. How are you gonna convince them to help other people when they won't even defend themselves. When it is even suggested, the anti-war faction comes to the fore and quashes it.


I would also like to add that G. W. Bush has lost my vote. Though, I won't be voting for Dean. I will sit this one out. The Prescription Drug bill and the illegal alien amnesty thing betray conservative thinking. I find it disgusting that I have to pay for foodstamps, welfare, and other costs for able-bodied people to sit on their asses without working when we have to go out of the country to find labor. The reason stated is that Americans won't take those jobs. This is true. Why would they take those jobs when they can make a better living by not working at all and watching TV all day? You take those entitlements away and you watch and see how fast those jobs get taken by Americans.

And, finally, Moog..... Why don't you worry about your own country. Your opinion as a Canadian means absolutely nothing to me. Just as my opinion on your country's politics should mean nothing to you. You can hate America all you want but the fact of the matter is, you owe your freedom and your prosperity (such as it is) to our way of government. Your freedom to hate us derives from us. And, you are welcome.

This comment was edited on Jan 8, 14:37.

I'm not arguing with the fact that US income taxes are progressive - that's the economic term for "the richer you get, the more you pay, not only in dollars, but as a percentage of your income". I think your estimate of the top 10% paying 87% is a little high, but the figures I have show it's certainly between 60-70%.
Anyway, the point is that the economy cycles every 8-to-10 (or so) years. It's at a high point in the late 70s, the late 80's, the late 90's and, everything remaining on track, will be again around 2006-09. It crashed in the early 80's, the early 90's, and - guess what - in 2001. This occurs for reasons far more subtle and important than taxation, and is entirely independent of which administration is in the White House.

The idea that the government of the day is wholly in charge of the economy is both bad and discredited, however you seem to be suggesting that political and economic policy has no effect on the real economy, this is daft.