RE: "Better alternative establishments" and the Left.

Collarspace Discussion Forums

Home Login Search

RE: "Better alternative establishments" and the Left.

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

Logged in as: Guest

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> RE: "Better alternative establishments" and the Left.

Page: << < prev 1 2 3 4 [5]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: "Better alternative establishments" and t... - 4/17/2007 10:38:56 AM

FirmhandKY

Posts: 8948
Joined: 9/21/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: meatcleaver

quote:

ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY

So Marxism is the answer? That's your response to the question I posed at the beginning of this thread?

Meat, you still won't even try to attempt to give an explanation - even in the most roundabout way - of what the system is that you wish to see as the "new establishment".

I've got nothing against free enterprise. I have however, got something against imposing a market on people who don't want it or exploiting people because they have resources. Capitalism has imposed itself on the world, the world never asked for it.

If the world had limitless resources I might be won round to capitalism but it hasn't. The world's resources are finite and we are living beyond our means and yet the markets don't respond to this very important fact or won't until it is far too late. The west over consumes and causes much of the planet to live in poverty by destroying indigenous cultures by forcing the markets on people. We subsize our agriculture and then dump the surplus on the third world destroying their market.

Somewhere along the line, there has to be some international control on the exploitation of the poor by powerful countries, there has to be some respect given to the cultures of other peoples. Sometimes it is these indigenous cultures that stop the people involved living in poverty. You said that life has more than just financial value, yet you offer an economic system that puts financial value on everything. As the apocryphal eskimo said, we didn't know we werre poor until we were told we were poor. I propose a little more respect for indigenous peoiple around the world and not ruining their lives because they have something we in the west want.

Ok, from this I get:

1. A one world government is the solution, with the power to back up it's laws and edicts through the use of force.

2. "Exploitation" must be stopped.

3. "Resources" must be preserved.

4. "Over consumption" must be stopped.

Now, the million dollar question ... Who defines "exploitation", "preserved" and "over consumption"? On what system of beliefs do you wish to rely on: whose definitions of those things will you accept? Where does their moral code come from?

You said that life has more than just financial value, yet you offer an economic system that puts financial value on everything.

Everything does have a value. And the best things in life are free.

You may not wish there to be financial aspects and consequences to all decisions, but there are. Wishing it away or ignoring it doesn't change that fact.

The free market system i.e. capitalism simply recognizes this facet of existence. I advocate it for the positive things it has brought about in the world, and for the important fact that I believe it was one of the two main philosophical threads that brought a world of individual rights and freedoms to the fore in human consciousness.

FirmKY

_____________________________

Some people are just idiots.

(in reply to meatcleaver)

Profile

Post #: 81

RE: "Better alternative establishments" and t... - 4/17/2007 12:52:16 PM

meatcleaver

Posts: 9030
Joined: 3/13/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY

Ok, from this I get:

1. A one world government is the solution, with the power to back up it's laws and edicts through the use of force.

2. "Exploitation" must be stopped.

3. "Resources" must be preserved.

4. "Over consumption" must be stopped.

Now, the million dollar question ... Who defines "exploitation", "preserved" and "over consumption"? On what system of beliefs do you wish to rely on: whose definitions of those things will you accept? Where does their moral code come from?

Only an idealist would call for self control because a capitalist out to make money has no control. I would create a democracy free from the influence of capital. I would not allow candidates to take private money or have any financial interests while in power or for ten years after being in power. During the ten years after power I would let them earn a salary and the state giving representatives a living pension during the ten years after their office as compensation. They would not be allowed to accummulate wealth and paid it after the ten years by any private financial body. The more that representatives and the function of government can be isolated from the corruption of capital the better.

quote:

ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY

You said that life has more than just financial value, yet you offer an economic system that puts financial value on everything.

Everything does have a value. And the best things in life are free.

You may not wish there to be financial aspects and consequences to all decisions, but there are. Wishing it away or ignoring it doesn't change that fact.

The free market system i.e. capitalism simply recognizes this facet of existence. I advocate it for the positive things it has brought about in the world, and for the important fact that I believe it was one of the two main philosophical threads that brought a world of individual rights and freedoms to the fore in human consciousness.

This is where we differ the most. Capitalism doesn't recognize it, capitalism imposes it. Capitalism stole the water which people drank and the ground on which they slept and enslaved the people to the market place. An individual only has rights and freedoms as defined by the market which are neither rights or freedoms but acceptable codes of behaviour as deemed by the market.

_____________________________

There are fascists who consider themselves humanitarians, like cannibals on a health kick, eating only vegetarians.

(in reply to FirmhandKY)

Profile

Post #: 82

RE: "Better alternative establishments" and t... - 4/17/2007 2:46:42 PM

FirmhandKY

Posts: 8948
Joined: 9/21/2004
Status: offline

ohh, come on. Tell me the truth ... your real name is marxcleaver, now isn't it?

Soooooo.... you are saying then, when tribes of men - in prehistory - figured out that some people were good and fast at making high quality arrow heads, and decided to trade for them rather than knocking the artist on the head and taking his work ... that that is somehow a capitalistic imposition?

FirmKY

PS. Some of your specific ideas have merit. Some of them fail to recognize the results of what human nature will actually produce in such an environment.

_____________________________

Some people are just idiots.

(in reply to meatcleaver)

Profile

Post #: 83

RE: "Better alternative establishments" and t... - 4/17/2007 2:59:45 PM

meatcleaver

Posts: 9030
Joined: 3/13/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY

ohh, come on. Tell me the truth ... your real name is marxcleaver, now isn't it?

Soooooo.... you are saying then, when tribes of men - in prehistory - figured out that some people were good and fast at making high quality arrow heads, and decided to trade for them rather than knocking the artist on the head and taking his work ... that that is somehow a capitalistic imposition?

FirmKY

PS. Some of your specific ideas have merit. Some of them fail to recognize the results of what human nature will actually produce in such an environment.

Trading and capitalism are not the same. One might trade useful products, in fact agricultural markets held by French rural communes (do not confuse with anything Marxist, this is a local political region) are specifically held for local people and peasants to trade useful merchandise without having to pay middle men (fill in capitalist here?). Cooperation that profits everyone.

The capitalist would buy from A and sell to B at a profit or lend money to A so A can buy the product from the capitalist that the capitalist bought from B. Thus the capitalist gets a profit by selling at a higher rate than he bought and also get interest off the money he lent to A. The capitalist gets rich without ever having contributed anything of significance to the society but by living from his wits. This was why usury was frowned on in the middle ages and seen as immoral.

EDIT Actually Islam still views usury as immoral. It is christianity that has compromised its values to accommodate capitalism.

< Message edited by meatcleaver -- 4/17/2007 3:10:36 PM >

_____________________________

There are fascists who consider themselves humanitarians, like cannibals on a health kick, eating only vegetarians.

(in reply to FirmhandKY)

Profile

Post #: 84

RE: "Better alternative establishments" and t... - 4/17/2007 3:24:30 PM

Mercnbeth

Posts: 11766
Status: offline

quote:

Trading and capitalism are not the same. One might trade useful products, in fact agricultural markets held by French rural communes (do not confuse with anything Marxist, this is a local political region) are specifically held for local people and peasants to trade useful merchandise without having to pay middle men (fill in capitalist here?). Cooperation that profits everyone

So barter isn't capitalism and therefore is not exploitive? Value is a created perception. Going to a primitive land that has gold, oil, diamonds, pearls, or any "precious" gem or item common and giving them mirrors, metal tools, or glass beads which they didn't have in exchange would not exploitive capitalism unless the barterer takes his goods and brings them back to his land and sells them for more than the cost of what the mirrors and glass beads cost? Both parties are happy with the exchange and perceive value in trading right? To fit this example into your model would you bring the primitive land leader to the country desiring his/her goods? Would you give him paper money at market exchange rate and then require he show up at Walmart to buy the beads and mirrors he really desired? What if he/she didn't want to go - would force be used?

This presupposes there is always goods available in the same amount to trade as well as desired goods in sufficient amount to get in exchange. What happens when there is drought, fire, earthquake, or the oysters stop making pearls? It sounds like your French communities are one season of global warming away from not having a trading partner. Are they totally isolated or is a part of their crop/product sold into the capitalist market where the profits are held in reserve?

Outside a situation of small neighboring communes making complementary goods is there any other condition where your version of "trading capitalism" would work?

(in reply to meatcleaver)

Profile

Post #: 85

RE: "Better alternative establishments" and t... - 4/17/2007 4:26:08 PM

meatcleaver

Posts: 9030
Joined: 3/13/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth

So barter isn't capitalism and therefore is not exploitive? Value is a created perception. Going to a primitive land that has gold, oil, diamonds, pearls, or any "precious" gem or item common and giving them mirrors, metal tools, or glass beads which they didn't have in exchange would not exploitive capitalism unless the barterer takes his goods and brings them back to his land and sells them for more than the cost of what the mirrors and glass beads cost? Both parties are happy with the exchange and perceive value in trading right? To fit this example into your model would you bring the primitive land leader to the country desiring his/her goods? Would you give him paper money at market exchange rate and then require he show up at Walmart to buy the beads and mirrors he really desired? What if he/she didn't want to go - would force be used?

This presupposes there is always goods available in the same amount to trade as well as desired goods in sufficient amount to get in exchange. What happens when there is drought, fire, earthquake, or the oysters stop making pearls? It sounds like your French communities are one season of global warming away from not having a trading partner. Are they totally isolated or is a part of their crop/product sold into the capitalist market where the profits are held in reserve?

Outside a situation of small neighboring communes making complementary goods is there any other condition where your version of "trading capitalism" would work?

I don't see trading as capitalism at all nor did merchants in the middleages who frowned on bartering because it was seen to interfer with commerce and hence, their profits. Such people that use such markets only take what they need, the idea isn't to accummulate wealth by producing as much as possible and selling at a higher price as possible, it is about taking what one nees and no more. Usually trading communities are just that, communities that accommodate shortages by off setting trade payments. A gives B lamb in spring and B gives A wine in Autumn or when B has something A wants. Capitalism is about profit and accummulating wealth, trade is about acquiring products or services in order to live. Such communities always had a way of helping and accommodating the poor in much better ways than we have today. It is capitalism with its psychopathic tendency to hang the poor out to dry that has the problem because it puts finance above human life. EDIT: This is one of the western values that collide with middle eastern values. Middle eastern culture put emphasis on providing for the poor and allowing the poor to have their dignity, this is seen as a core value, in the west it isn't. I'm not saying that's how it works out in practice all the time but the value is there.

As for bartering trinkets with primitive peoples, the westerners knew they were taking advantage of the aboriginal peoples who were naive and assumed the Europeans/westerners were acting in good faith. By the time they realised they weren't, it was often too late. If the aboriginal peoples were enlightened to the world view of the westerners then they could act in good faith. Take land for example, many aboriginal peoples didn't even have the concept that land could be owned by someone. Giving everything a monetary value is a western concept. As Oscar Wilde said, knowing the price of everything and the value of nothing. Paper money has to have its value underwritten and for that you have to have faith in the body guaranteeing the value, without that faith, paper money is just paper. Wouldn't aboriginal people see paper money as just being fancy printed paper?

< Message edited by meatcleaver -- 4/17/2007 4:35:32 PM >

_____________________________

There are fascists who consider themselves humanitarians, like cannibals on a health kick, eating only vegetarians.

(in reply to Mercnbeth)

Profile

Post #: 86

RE: "Better alternative establishments" and t... - 4/17/2007 4:33:51 PM

Sinergy

Posts: 9383
Joined: 4/26/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth

So barter isn't capitalism and therefore is not exploitive?

Correct.

Barter is taking something you make or do and trading it for something somebody else makes or does.

Capitalism is about amassing "capital" whether that be property, money, workers, etc. This translates roughly into controlling both the means of production and the wealth in an economy.

Sinergy

_____________________________

"There is a fine line between clever and stupid"
David St. Hubbins "This Is Spinal Tap"

"Every so often you let a word or phrase out and you want to catch it and bring it back. You cant do that, it is gone, gone forever." J. Danforth Quayle

(in reply to Mercnbeth)

Profile

Post #: 87

RE: "Better alternative establishments" and t... - 4/17/2007 5:05:44 PM

Mercnbeth

Posts: 11766
Status: offline

quote:

Capitalism is about profit and accumulating wealth, trade is about acquiring products or services in order to live. Such communities always had a way of helping and accommodating the poor in much better ways than we have today.

Tell me if they only acquired products or service in order to live how was their extra for the poor? Why should there be poor if everyone participated?

quote:

It is capitalism with its psychopathic tendency to hang the poor out to dry that has the problem because it puts finance above human life. EDIT: This is one of the western values that collide with middle eastern values. Middle eastern culture put emphasis on providing for the poor and allowing the poor to have their dignity, this is seen as a core value, in the west it isn't. I'm not saying that's how it works out in practice all the time but the value is there.

If only that were true there would have been a lot less tax to pay today. Middles east culture provides dignity for their poor? Not if the "poor" are woman. Not if the "poor" woman want to have a relationship with someone not approved by their family. And certainly not if the woman is raped, unless you define "dignity" as being flogged or stoned to death as a consequence. Those are some of the "core values" of middle eastern culture missing from the West. A west which provides not only basic social services, but the capitalist opportunity and access to provide for themselves if they are so motivated even it their sex happens to be female, and they happen to need to drive a car. Or is it your position that a woman driving a car is undignified?

Is Europe Western? I seem to remember that the Netherlands, France, Italy, Germany, the UK, and come to think of it all of the members of the EU have provisions for the "poor". Does "dignity", in your opinion, also come from the State?

quote:

Barter is taking something you make or do and trading it for something somebody else makes or does.

Capitalism is about amassing "capital" whether that be property, money, workers, etc. This translates roughly into controlling both the means of production and the wealth in an economy.

So if I manage to hold onto all or some of my gold bartered for beads I don't have capital? If I used some of my bartered gold for other goods or services I didn't used "barter" and not capital? You have very thin and self serving definitions.

If there is no value there is nothing to barter. The "middle man" barters his time, effort, and shopping skills in exchange for trading into currency. Whether you amass traded goods or the monetary result of selling those goods its still capital. Your effort to make the goods to begin with is capital. What they call "sweat equity" when you buy a depressed home is "capital". All create something of value based on someone else's perception. If someone gave me a car instead of cash for something I did it may be using barter to you, but its a semantic argument. The bottom line is I got something for something. Regardless of what that something is specifically, generally it can be referred to as capital, and at some point you have to accumulate enough of it to barter or buy what it is you need/want.

(in reply to meatcleaver)

Profile

Post #: 88

RE: "Better alternative establishments" and t... - 4/17/2007 11:47:26 PM

meatcleaver

Posts: 9030
Joined: 3/13/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth

quote:

Capitalism is about profit and accumulating wealth, trade is about acquiring products or services in order to live. Such communities always had a way of helping and accommodating the poor in much better ways than we have today.

Tell me if they only acquired products or service in order to live how was their extra for the poor? Why should there be poor if everyone participated?

In the middle ages communities were a lot more accepting of deviance than we are now. As many travellers point out when they travel amongst tribal people or rural poor, such people tend to be very generous with what they have and no matter how little it is they are happy to share with strangers. I've witnessed this myself when I travelled round India and Bangladesh but apparently this is not unique to those areas but anywhere where there is such poor. One reads about it in the middle ages, people would give a little food to travellers. It's a state of mind and being, that they too might one day need help from a stranger. This value tends to disappear in capitalist cultures simply because, I assume, such generosity is incompatible with capitalism.

I'm not saying we should go back to the middleages, far from it but the rural bartering markets of France work well for those it serves and people live to a higher standard than they would without them because excess wealth is not being skimmed off the community and what little money they have can be spent on essentials that needs money such as power or petrol. This form of living tends to use less resources with a concentration on need rather than want. But we have to face up to the fact that capitalism in its present form isn't the answer to the world problems because 1. It doesn't put a value on the environment and so it destroys it and we are most certainly destroying our children's and grandchildren's inheritence whether global warming is a fact or not. 2. There are just not enough resources to go round so capitalism can't solve poverty but it can make some people rich and keep a vast amount of people poor whilst over harvesting the planet on which we all need to live. A recipe for more war and revolutions. Take water, water tables lower and water becomes scarce. This problem with water is also happening in the USA were capitalist type farming has lowered the water tables alarmingly. It is also a problem in the middle east where Israeli western type farming has drained the Jordon river to a trickle and water levels have dropped alarmingly. Analysts predict wars over water there rather than wars over oil and not just there but in many places around the world. Capitalism takes none of this into account so if no one intevenes and mediates and no one is going to give up their vital capitalist interests, well... Capitalism is creating a world that will breed more and more terrorism.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth

Is Europe Western? I seem to remember that the Netherlands, France, Italy, Germany, the UK, and come to think of it all of the members of the EU have provisions for the "poor". Does "dignity", in your opinion, also come from the State?

Dignity comes from being able to participate in society, the poor won't starve or be without a roof in our societies but they are sidelined and unable to participate in society to any appreciable amount. One of the problems recognized with how we deal with the poor is that this sidelining takes away self respect and creates low esteem and so an underclass with all the problems that creates for society. As for them getting work, well even politicians accept that is not realistic because there isn't enough work to go round and if you are poor with a family you won't have the wealth to move to where work is and if one does, there is a tendency for families to split which causes another series of problems. Ghettoizing the poor seems to be all capitalism can do and if it was really left to capitalism, they would starve or they would have to steal. We tend to provide for the poor to stop potential trouble rather than trying to solve a social problem, that is beyond capitalism.

< Message edited by meatcleaver -- 4/18/2007 12:00:17 AM >

_____________________________

There are fascists who consider themselves humanitarians, like cannibals on a health kick, eating only vegetarians.

(in reply to Mercnbeth)

Profile

Post #: 89

RE: "Better alternative establishments" and t... - 4/18/2007 10:50:36 AM

luckydog1

Posts: 2736
Joined: 1/16/2006
Status: offline

I tougth deviants were burned as witches in the middle ages. Why was there a continet wide series of Inns for travelers if everyone shared? I am sure that very poor people are happy to trade some rice for one of your fine Cuban cigars, you are not telling me you would eat in these people homes and not give anything in return, are you?
Exactly how many people in France are living in a non money economy? I found that hard to believe so I googled the term "rural bartering markets of France" , and got one relevant hit. http://www.iht.com/articles/1995/08/05/barter.t.php Is this what you are talking about, the Troc Tout. Plenty of stuff listed on it are luxury, not based on need. We do that in America also. Check out "freecycling" on the web some time. Or "Tradeio". Every city in the world has a Flea market. But these people are not living in an economy based on Barter. They are engaging in a little barter on the side, everyone does that don't they?

Actually Capitalism does take shrinking (fresh) water resources into account. Desalinization plants, Pipelines, efficient delivery. But more importantly Capitalism tries to make a situation where war over water would be counterproductive. It is better to buy water than fight over it. Thats the part of the WTO ( the Mediator you refer to) et al, you just don't grasp Meat. The water is not disapearing because of the Isrealis, but because there is a rapidly growing population in the entire region/world. Plenty of the Mid East Region is going dry, and water tables are dropping most everywhere.

< Message edited by luckydog1 -- 4/18/2007 10:54:03 AM >

(in reply to meatcleaver)

Profile

Post #: 90

RE: "Better alternative establishments" and t... - 4/18/2007 11:39:35 AM

Mercnbeth

Posts: 11766
Status: offline

quote:

Dignity comes from being able to participate in society, the poor won't starve or be without a roof in our societies but they are sidelined and unable to participate in society to any appreciable amount.

MC, Appreciate that I can only speak to the situation as it exists in the US. A poor person's participation in society is up to them. Do you believe an exception proves the rule? People go from the poverty and living in the ghetto to a home in Beverly Hills fairly regularly. Sometime the route follows a path of music or sports, but more often it is the result of using the available resources, going to school, getting an education and working their asses off. Why is that that some living in the exact same conditions make that move while many others don't? Do you think that there was a different degree of dignity?

quote:

As for them getting work, well even politicians accept that is not realistic because there isn't enough work to go round and if you are poor with a family you won't have the wealth to move to where work is and if one does, there is a tendency for families to split which causes another series of problems.

There may not be $100k jobs you can find by reading 'Help Wanted' signs outside of high rise buildings. There may not even be $35-50k jobs ready for the taking in the newspaper. But there are jobs paying $10 - $15/hour common, at least in LA.

There are two problems. The first is the same as I get when I interview a person getting out of college. Immediately they want to earn $50k based upon the "work" they did graduating with a 3.0 cumulative grade. In the business word, outside of the science degrees, their liberal arts or similar degree is worthless to me. Those I interview don't seem to understand that fact of life and obviously they didn't learn a key point of business - you must bring into the business at least as much as you cost. There is only one exception to this rule, you can be a burocrat or work in higher education and never have that requirement. In those instances you never run out of taxpayer money or tuition money from parents; so you can create an entirely different business model - one that doesn't need to be concerned with the bottom line. However that gets into problem two.

Staying on the first, the same is true at the HS or any entry level. A kid goes into franchise burger place, or retail store complaining that they pay minimum wage, but doesn't appreciate that in 2-3 years they have an opportunity to not only make more money, but if they have the skills, get into management. Commonly people what today, not realizing that they have the opportunity to achieve exactly what they want except they have to wait a few tomorrows.

There is a problem in the US that gets in the way of this idea that supports your position. In the US you lose benefits and assistance if you try to better yourself by working. You lose medical benefits, child care support, and a host of others including housing assistance. It does not make sense for many to go into a work program, starting at the bottom at $10 an hour, when as a result their personal "bottom line" at the end of the week is lower than it would be if they stayed under the care of social programs. To me, that is how dignity for what now is a couple of generations of US citizens has been lost. We've gone from requiring them to fish or helping them obtain a fishing pole to giving them day old fish.

quote:

As for them getting work, well even politicians accept that is not realistic because there isn't enough work to go round

"Politician" must have that position. Without it, the largest employer in the USA would start laying off - the government. It's a self serving institution. There has never been a successful social program. They all grow adding more bureaucrats and costing more money with little return. Government social programs are the only business that has no requirement of success either in pragmatic observation or profiting. Their only requirement is "good intent" and when they fail they blame not having enough money. Unlike a business in this situation, instead of going out of business or bankrupt, they get more from the taxpayers.

The use of social programs reduces a persons dignity and are designed to keep them poor; while creating a 'make-work' bureaucracy no different than the FDR programs created during the Depression. Individual people working in this sector of government may be the most dedicated and committed people in the world, but historically there is no history of general success or accomplishment. If so, their bureaucracy would cease to exist. That condition defines why they will never succeed.

(in reply to meatcleaver)

Profile

Post #: 91

RE: "Better alternative establishments" and t... - 4/18/2007 11:53:03 AM

meatcleaver

Posts: 9030
Joined: 3/13/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: luckydog1

I tougth deviants were burned as witches in the middle ages. Why was there a continet wide series of Inns for travelers if everyone shared? I am sure that very poor people are happy to trade some rice for one of your fine Cuban cigars, you are not telling me you would eat in these people homes and not give anything in return, are you?

My penchant for Cuban cigars gives a few Cubans a chance to earn some cash that the US resents them having.

Exactly how many people in France are living in a non money economy?
I found that hard to believe so I googled the term "rural bartering markets of France" , and got one relevant hit. http://www.iht.com/articles/1995/08/05/barter.t.php Is this what you are talking about, the Troc Tout. Plenty of stuff listed on it are luxury, not based on need. We do that in America also. Check out "freecycling" on the web some time. Or "Tradeio". Every city in the world has a Flea market. But these people are not living in an economy based on Barter. They are engaging in a little barter on the side, everyone does that don't they?

Actually you need to go and look for them, they are huge markets with first class food, far better food than you can buy in supermarkets. When I lived in France I used to trade bespoke machine parts for sides for sides of beef and pork, first class wine, eau de vie, game birds, fencing, just about anything you could think of. Many middleclass French use them too, trading their skills for first class goods.

Actually Capitalism does take shrinking (fresh) water resources into account. Desalinization plants, Pipelines, efficient delivery. But more importantly Capitalism tries to make a situation where war over water would be counterproductive. It is better to buy water than fight over it. Thats the part of the WTO ( the Mediator you refer to) et al, you just don't grasp Meat. The water is not disapearing because of the Isrealis, but because there is a rapidly growing population in the entire region/world. Plenty of the Mid East Region is going dry, and water tables are dropping most everywhere.

I have no doubt that a growing population is part of the problem but also none traditional farming is part of the problem. If desalination was so cost effective, why aren't they shooting up on coasts all over the world where there are water shortages? Even Saudi Arabia and Yemen and UAE who can afford desalination plants import certain crops because of the water necessary to grow them, it is much cheaper than desalinating water. In fact China imports soya beans because it is a better strategy than using its own water, in fact it is seen as an alternative way of importing water ie. instaed of. Desalination is expensive.

< Message edited by meatcleaver -- 4/18/2007 11:57:00 AM >

_____________________________

There are fascists who consider themselves humanitarians, like cannibals on a health kick, eating only vegetarians.

(in reply to luckydog1)

Profile

Post #: 92

RE: "Better alternative establishments" and t... - 4/19/2007 12:50:16 AM

luckydog1

Posts: 2736
Joined: 1/16/2006
Status: offline

Meat you ducked my question...you do give the poor people you eat with something more valubale than what they gave you right? Cigars are just an example. Like I said we have Flea and Farmers Markets in every city in America. They are not an economic system, apperantly you do not grasp the difference. Yes, growing food in Yemen is extremely expensive. Desalinization plants are in operation all over the world, they are energy intensive(expensive), but as water becomes scarcer, the cost will equalise and become effective. China buying water in the form of Soy, is capitalism, I should have included it in my list..

(in reply to meatcleaver)

Profile

Post #: 93

RE: "Better alternative establishments" and t... - 4/19/2007 1:11:27 AM

meatcleaver

Posts: 9030
Joined: 3/13/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: luckydog1

Meat you ducked my question...you do give the poor people you eat with something more valubale than what they gave you right? Cigars are just an example. Like I said we have Flea and Farmers Markets in every city in America. They are not an economic system, apperantly you do not grasp the difference. Yes, growing food in Yemen is extremely expensive. Desalinization plants are in operation all over the world, they are energy intensive(expensive), but as water becomes scarcer, the cost will equalise and become effective. China buying water in the form of Soy, is capitalism, I should have included it in my list..

Actually the French markets are not flea markets, their produce are not secondhand or second rate but superior to many products you can buy in a store. They are a way of not being ripped off by middlemen who push prices down for the seller and push them up as much as the market allows them for the purchaser and thus takes excess profit without adding anything positive. I doubt people travel 200 miles to a flea market which is what Parisians do. In fact a group of us will be taking the hi-speed train down to Poitiers from Amsterdam to stock up in a couple of weeks. A 1000 kilometer round trip and still better produce and cheaper than the local supermarkets. We'll be happy and the farmers will be happy. And no we are not adding to the world's carbon emissions, the train will go whether we are on it or not and train is the least polluting way to travel other than on foot or bike.

As for giving the poor something, that is difficult when they would be insulted to be offered something for their hospitality. I do give in different ways, I would make donations to the local school or hospital but you couldn't tell them that, most cultures seem to find that demeaning.

_____________________________

There are fascists who consider themselves humanitarians, like cannibals on a health kick, eating only vegetarians.

(in reply to luckydog1)

Profile

Post #: 94