Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: World Opinion


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> RE: World Opinion Page: <<   < prev  1 2 3 [4] 5   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: World Opinion - 9/25/2006 3:25:14 AM   
philosophy


Posts: 5284
Joined: 2/15/2004
Status: offline 		"Philosophy, as you can see I'm not at all an Imperialist or an Interventionist like a lot of people in Washington are."

yup Popeye, i can see your point here. i may be wrong but reaching back to my dimly remembered history lessons, i think the position you adopt can be characterised as isolationist. Leave America alone and America leaves you alone..........
We shall have to agree to differ on that point though, as i don't think isolationism is a sustainable position. Taking environmental pollution as one starting point it is easy to see how such things don't respect international borders, they are pan-national problems. While America puts out such a level of pollution it can't be truly isolationist because it isn't leaving the rest of the world alone. You have mentioned on other threads your dislike of Kyoto, and the details of that treaty are open to debate, but it does lead to an interesting question........given you would like to see America take an isolationist stance, how would you deal with things like pollution affecting other countries, or other pan-national concerns?

< Message edited by philosophy -- 9/25/2006 3:26:02 AM >

(in reply to Dtesmoac)
Profile   Post #: 61
RE: World Opinion - 9/25/2006 4:44:17 AM   
LadyEllen


Posts: 10931
Joined: 6/30/2006
From: Stourport-England
Status: offline 		Hi Popeye

I totally agree with you about all this foreign aid money not being what the people would prefer to have done with their taxes, but I also have to support it because its what gives us wealthy nations influence in the countries who receive it - in theory at least. In theory, we should have a say in what they do with the money, and in theory they should stand up and be counted when we need friends in their region. That these are rarely the case is the reason why the whole thing needs to be looked at.

I dont know the situation with the US, but here in the UK we lost an empire over the decades since the end of the second world war. Most of our colonies decided by one means or another, that they wanted independence from the British - note independence. However, somehow or another these ex colonies receive millions of pounds every year in donations, loans and by way of the export credits guarantee scheme we operate, (whereby if the foreign client doesnt pay, then the government will pay out of tax payers' money, the price of the goods sold).

Do they spend the money on the development projects for which it is intended? It would seem rarely so. I seem to remember (and I may be wrong here) one African king whose country received a few million pounds for infrastructure improvement, using the money instead for a fleet of Rolls Royce cars and a couple of extra wives, whilst his people lived in absolute squalor - they received no benefit whatever. The thing is, these people are always there to make promises and accept the money, but when we ask why the money wasnt used for what it was meant for, we are told to keep our noses out as they are an independent nation and we have no business meddling in their affairs. Priceless.

Equally, where are they when we need their help and influence? Our ex colonies in Africa will not do one thing or even say very much about the horror that is unfolding in Zimbabwe now. They all know about it, and they all dislike Mugabe and what he is doing - but to support British policy  would be to seem subject to our influence, and so they say its a matter for the people of Zimbabwe, wring their hands and then ask for more aid.

The whole system needs to be overhauled. I dont mind contributing tax money to aid projects and the like, but in return we either need repayment with interest (which they cannot do), or better still with the sort of friendship, allegiance and good practice which would make the whole thing worthwhile.

If that cannot happen, then we should stop all foreign aid until it does, or switch to private donations via charities which even with all their faults, seem to reach more of the ordinary people than do the corrupt officials of these countries, with the donations they handle.

And the export credits guarantee system needs to be stopped immediately. It was ever only a means of propping up British exporters of tanks, guns, bombs and torture equipment anyway. A lovely thought that my tax money has paid for some of these shithead dictators to persecute, abuse, torture and kill people who disagreed with them.

E

(in reply to philosophy)
Profile   Post #: 62
RE: World Opinion - 9/25/2006 12:15:49 PM   
popeye1250


Posts: 18104
Joined: 1/27/2006
From: New Hampshire
Status: offline 		Lady Ellen, I largely agree with you on this. The corruption in these programs is SO widespread as to make them useless.
But in the U.S. we do things a little differently than in England.
I just don't think that MY govt. should be in this "foreign aid" business at all.
They are *supposed* to be running our government in Washington, D.C. not a charity for foreign countries.
This stuff started with The Marshall Plan and like all govt. programs just spiraled out of control.
If my govt. actually *LISTENED* to the People like it's supposed to be doing we'd be out of this stuff tommorrow morning.

(in reply to LadyEllen)
Profile   Post #: 63
RE: World Opinion - 9/25/2006 12:31:12 PM   
Zensee


Posts: 1564
Joined: 9/4/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: popeye1250
They are *supposed* to be running our government in Washington, D.C. not a charity for foreign countries.

Cleaning up your own mess isn't charity.
0

_____________________________

"Before enlightenment, chop wood and carry water. After enlightenment, chop wood and carry water." (proverb)

(in reply to popeye1250)
Profile   Post #: 64
RE: World Opinion - 9/25/2006 12:48:35 PM   
popeye1250


Posts: 18104
Joined: 1/27/2006
From: New Hampshire
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: philosophy

"Philosophy, as you can see I'm not at all an Imperialist or an Interventionist like a lot of people in Washington are."

yup Popeye, i can see your point here. i may be wrong but reaching back to my dimly remembered history lessons, i think the position you adopt can be characterised as isolationist. Leave America alone and America leaves you alone..........
We shall have to agree to differ on that point though, as i don't think isolationism is a sustainable position. Taking environmental pollution as one starting point it is easy to see how such things don't respect international borders, they are pan-national problems. While America puts out such a level of pollution it can't be truly isolationist because it isn't leaving the rest of the world alone. You have mentioned on other threads your dislike of Kyoto, and the details of that treaty are open to debate, but it does lead to an interesting question........given you would like to see America take an isolationist stance, how would you deal with things like pollution affecting other countries, or other pan-national concerns?


Philosophy, I'm not a strict Isolationist but I think the pendulum is definately swinging in that direction and I think that a good dose of isolationism would actually be healthy for the U.S. after Bush.
We simply don't need to do business with "all" countries in the world.
We still have Troops in more than 130 countries! As a U.S. Taxpayer I'm no longer willing to pay for those Troops and I make my opinions known to my elected public officials under the threat of not voting for them.
Also, I'm not a fan of this "world leader" crap; I vote for Australia as "world leader." or maybe...Romania.
Let China be "world leader" and see how they like spending so much of their taxpayer's money in foreign countries.
The U.S. govt. is simply NOT a good stewart of the Taxpayer's money! We need to stop spending more money than we're taking in.We need to get rid of a lot of departments, programs, and other expenditures.
Philosophy, if you had a household income of 50,000 pounds say and you were spending 250,000 pounds per anum how long do you think you could continue that?
That's the situation the people who are running our govt. have put us in!
And these people consider themselves "the best?"
I'm starting to think that anyone with a college or university degree should be excluded from govt. service.

(in reply to philosophy)
Profile   Post #: 65
RE: World Opinion - 9/25/2006 3:20:06 PM   
LotusSong


Posts: 6334
Joined: 7/2/2006
From: Domme Emeritus
Status: offline 		edited because I already addressed the issue. Sorry.

< Message edited by LotusSong -- 9/25/2006 3:22:01 PM >

(in reply to LadyEllen)
Profile   Post #: 66
RE: World Opinion - 9/25/2006 5:32:45 PM   
Dtesmoac


Posts: 565
Joined: 6/22/2006
Status: offline 		Which contributes most to detering non conventional warfare?
$15 billion of taxes on helping people to like you
$138 billion on military forces to fight those who don't

Is there a value to soft security i.e. investing money to remove the causes of militancy or is only hard security (i.e. military equipment) of value?

(in reply to LotusSong)
Profile   Post #: 67
RE: World Opinion - 9/26/2006 12:47:45 AM   
popeye1250


Posts: 18104
Joined: 1/27/2006
From: New Hampshire
Status: offline 		Dtes, you could give Bin Laden $15 B and he'd still want to kill us.
How's about we don't give anyone any money?

(in reply to Dtesmoac)
Profile   Post #: 68
RE: World Opinion - 9/26/2006 4:59:38 AM   
philosophy


Posts: 5284
Joined: 2/15/2004
Status: offline 		Popeye...sorry for delaying my response, but here it is :)

i have absolutely no problem with isolationism as a position. i don't think it's that good an idea personally, but every country has the right to pull up the drawbridge.........as for your remarks about spending more than one earns, again i absolutely agree....to paraphrase Mr Micawber, "income $10, expenses $9.99,result happiness........ income $10, expenses $10.01, result unhappiness"......however i note with sadness you didn't address the specific issue i put to you in my earlier post regarding pan-national events or issues. The modern world throws up so many challenges that affect more than one country.....how does an isolationist deal with those?

(in reply to popeye1250)
Profile   Post #: 69
RE: World Opinion - 9/26/2006 5:10:45 AM   
Dtesmoac


Posts: 565
Joined: 6/22/2006
Status: offline 		popeye - very true,
but perhaps he would have been unble to find so many caves in so many places where people were willing to help him and perhaps fewer people willing to kill and be killed because they "hate" the West.

There are always nutters but normally they are isolated and unable to built up a network because they do not have a cause that others will follow. 


(in reply to popeye1250)
Profile   Post #: 70
RE: World Opinion - 9/26/2006 5:32:31 AM   
popeye1250


Posts: 18104
Joined: 1/27/2006
From: New Hampshire
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: philosophy

"Philosophy, as you can see I'm not at all an Imperialist or an Interventionist like a lot of people in Washington are."

yup Popeye, i can see your point here. i may be wrong but reaching back to my dimly remembered history lessons, i think the position you adopt can be characterised as isolationist. Leave America alone and America leaves you alone..........
We shall have to agree to differ on that point though, as i don't think isolationism is a sustainable position. Taking environmental pollution as one starting point it is easy to see how such things don't respect international borders, they are pan-national problems. While America puts out such a level of pollution it can't be truly isolationist because it isn't leaving the rest of the world alone. You have mentioned on other threads your dislike of Kyoto, and the details of that treaty are open to debate, but it does lead to an interesting question........given you would like to see America take an isolationist stance, how would you deal with things like pollution affecting other countries, or other pan-national concerns?


Philosophy, I assume this is the area I failed to address?
I don't really have a good answer on pollution.
They say that Russia, Brazil, and China are worse poluters than the U.S. by far.
The U.S. is now an incredably clean country pollution-wise. I drink the tap water here and it tastes good.
Also the air in this area is incredably clean and it smells good too!
Of course you can't say that for NYC or Los Angeles.
With all this "outsourcing" going on we have less and less pollution in this country and China and Brazil and Mexico have more as they get the manufacturing plants that used to be in this country.
As for that "KYOTO" thing it's just a farce. "I'll see that bet and raise you three Pollution Credits!"
What do you do, talk with Mexico, Brazil, and China?
I don't know.
From what I've read and seen on t.v. Mexico is "incredably polluted."

(in reply to philosophy)
Profile   Post #: 71
RE: World Opinion - 9/26/2006 6:07:16 AM   
meatcleaver


Posts: 9030
Joined: 3/13/2006
Status: offline 		I don't like to disapoint you popeye, though whether one can trust these stats I don't know.

http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/L-pollutioncomparisons.htm

(in reply to popeye1250)
Profile   Post #: 72
RE: World Opinion - 9/26/2006 6:43:12 AM   
popeye1250


Posts: 18104
Joined: 1/27/2006
From: New Hampshire
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: meatcleaver

I don't like to disapoint you popeye, though whether one can trust these stats I don't know.

http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/L-pollutioncomparisons.htm


Meat, I wouldn't trust those "statistics", it mentioned "Price of a gallon of gas"  "U.S. - $1.07"
Gasoline hasn't been that low here since about *1996*!
We've lost a hell of a lot of manufacturing in the last ten years, the cars today are incredably cleaner than they were ten years ago and there's a lot of other misstakes in there too.
Who wrote that stuff anyway?

On edit, they use "Portugal" in one category only when it bolsters their case but in none of the other categories.
That is clearly a biased list of "statistics" to make the U.S. look bad for whatever reason the author had in mind.
One thing about "statistics", you can make them say whatever you want them to say.
For example I can say that out of 500,000 people in Denver, Colorado not one has ever been bitten by a Tiger.
And I'd be right.

< Message edited by popeye1250 -- 9/26/2006 6:53:58 AM >

(in reply to meatcleaver)
Profile   Post #: 73
RE: World Opinion - 9/26/2006 7:25:30 AM   
philosophy


Posts: 5284
Joined: 2/15/2004
Status: offline 		"The U.S. is now an incredably clean country pollution-wise."
"I don't like to disapoint you popeye, though whether one can trust these stats I don't know."
"One thing about "statistics", you can make them say whatever you want them to say."

.........almost a mini-series there.........difficult issue though, we need a reliable trustworthy source for comparison or we can't get at the truth. i have to say that i was somewhat surprised to read your assertion regarding the US's green credentials Popeye......but maybe where you live it is that good. Thing is, as you pointed out, we probably can't say the same about L.A.
However, i'm sure you can see that this is a pan-national issue. It requires a response that is co-ordinated from more than one national governments perspective. Even if it turns out that there is no problem we have to be sure, because if there IS a problem we need to act fast. Popeye, what theoretical organisation would work for you regarding issues like this? Or can responses to these sort of issues be organised in an ad hoc way?

(in reply to popeye1250)
Profile   Post #: 74
RE: World Opinion - 9/26/2006 4:07:38 PM   
popeye1250


Posts: 18104
Joined: 1/27/2006
From: New Hampshire
Status: offline 		Philosophy, obviously the ad hoc way would be the best way to go assumming that there is a "problem."
Now scientists are saying that increased solar activity is responsable for the earth's warming.
What do we do in that case?
One thing we do know is that the earth has been warming and cooling for eons.
A hundred years from now who among us will care?
This really isn't an important issue to me.

< Message edited by popeye1250 -- 9/26/2006 4:09:55 PM >

(in reply to philosophy)
Profile   Post #: 75
RE: World Opinion - 9/26/2006 5:48:40 PM   
Dtesmoac


Posts: 565
Joined: 6/22/2006
Status: offline 		Love the I dont give a shit about anyone else approach, popeye, but I have kids so I do give a shit. US on most measures whether in terms of resources used per person, energy used per person, carbon dioxide emmited per person equivalents, or in total numbers of useage out put compared with other countries the US comes out top or near the top. Where they do well is localised issues of ground contamination, water contamination and some waste disposal, where here have been local incdents and so there has been some kind of legal issue. If you look at OSHA (HEalth and Safety) fines compared with EPA / DNR (Environmental) it costs more in US to pollute locally than to injure people.!!!!  But there is little to no cnsideration of environmental impacts outside of the US borders. Russia, China etc are really good and localised horendous pollution to a point of local ecological genocide, but their carbon emmisions are way lower (though catching up)

I'll need to check figures at work tomorrow but US is way greater than most of the world and a fair bit bigger than Europe in the global pollution stakes.

Sorry Popeye which ever stats you go by the US is not a good global citizen on the pollution front.......but then noone else is that good either. If you look at potential for reduction the US has high potential because technology and options exist for it to change it just lacks the desire.

see www.bbc.co.uk science and nature section today  - World warmest for 12000 years - its the rate of temp change that is key. Also ref my earlier tirade about solar irradiance etc.  


(in reply to popeye1250)
Profile   Post #: 76
RE: World Opinion - 9/26/2006 9:39:03 PM   
popeye1250


Posts: 18104
Joined: 1/27/2006
From: New Hampshire
Status: offline 		Dtes, "Global Citizen?" lol Cum bay ah.
"Cut those rain forrests down! We're building condos!"
Again, it just isn't an important issue to me.
Now, let me go outside and turn my car off. It's been idling for the last 5 hours.

(in reply to Dtesmoac)
Profile   Post #: 77
RE: World Opinion - 9/27/2006 4:51:46 AM   
philosophy


Posts: 5284
Joined: 2/15/2004
Status: offline 		"Philosophy, obviously the ad hoc way would be the best way to go assumming that there is a "problem."
Now scientists are saying that increased solar activity is responsable for the earth's warming.
What do we do in that case?
One thing we do know is that the earth has been warming and cooling for eons.
A hundred years from now who among us will care?
This really isn't an important issue to me."

.....from the arguments you have advanced so far Popeye, i can see how you would envision an ad hoc approach working.....all well and good, there's no reason in principle why it oughtn't.
As to the causes of global warming, well solar flares, volcanic activity and other natural events undoubtedly have an affect on the world's climate. Such effects can be traced back in history; the writings of astronomers long dead, geological surveys, tree ring data....all point to these factors as being significent. Indeed i saw a graph a while back that showed a remarkable correlation between those events and historical records of climate. However........the graph also showed that in the last hundred years or so we have been sticking a dirty great thumb on the scales, distorting the natural causes and creating our own man-made climatic change. i shall try and find a link to the graph online.
You ask whether a hundred years from now whether any of us will care......and you know that none of us are likely to live that long. i suspect that a basic difference between us is that i truly do care what sort of world will exist in a hundred years time. My children are both dead,  i don't know if you have any kids......but it isn't for our sake that some of us worry about climate change...it is for the children's sake that we care. All the children.
You say it isn't an important issue for you.......perhaps not............but that's not isolationism......it's something entirely different.

< Message edited by philosophy -- 9/27/2006 4:52:51 AM >

(in reply to popeye1250)
Profile   Post #: 78
RE: World Opinion - 9/27/2006 12:16:13 PM   
popeye1250


Posts: 18104
Joined: 1/27/2006
From: New Hampshire
Status: offline 		Philosophy, did you think I was going to say the "U.N."?
LOL, they can't even find $22-$24 BILLION DOLLARS that's "missing" in that SOO successful "Oil for Food" scandal!
It's been missing for a few years now and they STILL don't know where it is!
I mean how does someone "misplace" $22-$24 BILLION DOLLARS?
Philosophy, I heard that one of the first things they do to Mercedes Benz' and other cars from Europe when they arrive in the U.S. is to put catalytic converters in them because cars in Europe don't have them.
Is that true?

(in reply to philosophy)
Profile   Post #: 79
RE: World Opinion - 9/27/2006 4:37:33 PM   
philosophy


Posts: 5284
Joined: 2/15/2004
Status: offline 		"Philosophy, I heard that one of the first things they do to Mercedes Benz' and other cars from Europe when they arrive in the U.S. is to put catalytic converters in them because cars in Europe don't have them.
Is that true?"

.....nope as far as i know, certainly in the UK car emissions have to be below a certain point in order to pass their MOT...road worthiness test.
As for the UN.......i really wasn't expecting you to say that, honest.....lol.........it's a serious question..........as someone who leans towards an isolationist view, how do you solve these sort of problems?

(in reply to popeye1250)
Profile   Post #: 80
Page:   <<   < prev  1 2 3 [4] 5   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> RE: World Opinion Page: <<   < prev  1 2 3 [4] 5   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.094