> the problem with Communism and its variants is that the workers
> have to be monitored by enforers to keep working. With capitalism,
> the workers have an incentive to keep working.
Actually, in both systems some workers are motivate and some are not.
There is an external incentive to keep working only if there is some
sort of monitoring. Don't confuse communism with soviet style
marxist-leninism; the latter is state capitalism, despite the spin
doctors.
> Even in Israel, the collectives don't work as hard as the farmers
> who own their own farm and products.
Actually, they do. The significant variable is not individual versus
collective ownership, but how much of a surplus is available. Also
note that an employee doesn't have the same incentives as an owner,
whether that owner be an individual or a collective.
Unsolicited bulk E-mail subject to legal action. I reserve the
right to publicly post or ridicule any abusive E-mail. Reply to
domain Patriot dot net user shmuel+news to contact me. Do not
reply to spamtrap@library.lspace.org
Roger Blake Messages: 167 Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
Senior Member
On 2012-12-17, Peter Flass <Peter_Flass@Yahoo.com> wrote:
> When we say "The Democrats" want something or think something, we're
> talking about the 'leadership'. You can think and feel whatever you
> want, but it's their opinions that count.
Last time I checked this was not the case in the House of Representatives.
However, the useless, spineless Republicans do seem to lack the will to
stand up to the Communis..., I mean, the "Democrats."
For anyone who lived through the Cold War, there are no words to describe
the irony of seeing Pravda warning the U.S. about the direction we are
taking:
--
------------------------------------------------------------ -----------------
Roger Blake (Change "invalid" to "com" for email. Google Groups killfiled.)
"Climate policy has almost nothing to do anymore with environmental
protection... the next world climate summit in Cancun is actually
an economy summit during which the distribution of the world's
resources will be negotiated." -- Ottmar Edenhofer, IPCC
------------------------------------------------------------ -----------------
>>>> > "Oh, that is all well and good, but, voice or no voice, the people
>>>> > can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy.
>>>> > All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked
>>>>
>>>> Doesn’t work when they know that they arent being attacked.
>>
>> Rod - you're arguing with someone who's been dead for over 60
>> years.
>>
>
> Whatever else you can say, Der dicke Hermann was a smart cookie.
For sure, the best demonstration of the truth of his statements
there IME was in England when the Falklands war happened. A year earlier
Argentina was the place the beef came from, and the Falklands were unheard
of. Suddenly the entire country came over all patriotic and enthused with a
need to bash the Argies and protect "our people" in the Falklands. The
speed at which war fever spread and the extent to which it spread was eye
opening.
Note well, I make no comment here as to the importance or otherwise
of the Falklands war. I simply observe that, in a country that hadn't known
war for nearly forty years, war fever was easily achieved over a spot of
land hardly anyone had even heard of.
--
Steve O'Hara-Smith | Directable Mirror Arrays
C:>WIN | A better way to focus the sun
The computer obeys and wins. | licences available see
You lose and Bill collects. | http://www.sohara.org/
>> For the most part, the "free" press knows which side its bread is
>> buttered on, and they are very reluctant to call high government
>> officials liars even when they are.
>
> At least when those high government officials are Democrats. The press
> has certainly have shown they will not go after 0bama for any reason.
>
> For example, where are the Woodwards and Bernsteins of today to
> investigate the Benghazi "bump in the road?" Any Republican president
> would have been skewered by the press, and for good reason, over that
> debacle. But because 0bama has the magical "D" next to his name the
> mainstream press keeps it quiet and it's all good, man!
> And so what if
> 0bama received more votes than there were voters in some precincts?
> That just shows how popular he is! Rejoice in having a candidate so
> saintly that even the dead vote for him! Big deal that we don't even
> know what grades our illustrious Chief Executive received in college
> due to him having his records sealed -- it's all good, as long as he has
> that miracle "D" on his side!
>
> The double-standard is obvious and it is toxic.
You may actually want to test the double standard and see it it is true.
I just looked for John Boehner's Xarvier College records.
Bin Laden was not named by the (R) government until several days
after 911 .
The US has enough voting irregularities for everyone. It used to be
gerrymandering the boundaries was enough. Now it is poll times, long
waiting lines, voter ID and poll locations used to skew the vote by
a few percent.
Unsolicited bulk E-mail subject to legal action. I reserve the
right to publicly post or ridicule any abusive E-mail. Reply to
domain Patriot dot net user shmuel+news to contact me. Do not
reply to spamtrap@library.lspace.org
Unsolicited bulk E-mail subject to legal action. I reserve the
right to publicly post or ridicule any abusive E-mail. Reply to
domain Patriot dot net user shmuel+news to contact me. Do not
reply to spamtrap@library.lspace.org
Unsolicited bulk E-mail subject to legal action. I reserve the
right to publicly post or ridicule any abusive E-mail. Reply to
domain Patriot dot net user shmuel+news to contact me. Do not
reply to spamtrap@library.lspace.org
Unsolicited bulk E-mail subject to legal action. I reserve the
right to publicly post or ridicule any abusive E-mail. Reply to
domain Patriot dot net user shmuel+news to contact me. Do not
reply to spamtrap@library.lspace.org
> When we say "The Democrats" want something or think something,
> we're talking about the 'leadership'.
And still wrong. Both major parties are heavily influenced by the
large corporations and the wealthy. Both major parties pay lip service
to small businesses, and neither really cares.
Unsolicited bulk E-mail subject to legal action. I reserve the
right to publicly post or ridicule any abusive E-mail. Reply to
domain Patriot dot net user shmuel+news to contact me. Do not
reply to spamtrap@library.lspace.org
>>>> > He's trying to get a power which isn't rein checked by Congress.
>>>> ^^^^?
>>>> > Small businesses are screwed; that seems to be the target of the Dem.
>>>> > leadership.
>>>>
>>>> Wow, you sound like such an idiot with this stuff!
>>>>
>>>> Why, in your mind, do you think the Democrats want to screw small
>>>> business?
>>>>
>>>
>>> Because they're successful and not dependent on the government for handouts.
>>
>> So, you think that answers "why"?
>>
>> It doesn't.
>>
>> And it's stupid.
>>
>> Sorry to be insulting, but having voted Democrat a few times,
>> and not wanting to destroy any business big or small, I take exception.
>>
>
> When we say "The Democrats" want something or think something, we're
> talking about the 'leadership'. You can think and feel whatever you
> want, but it's their opinions that count.
Sorry, but when we say Democrat it does not mean just the leaders.
Not by any stretch of the imagination.
And there's still the inference that half the country votes for
candidates that want to destroy small business which is absurd.
Still waiting for someone to put forward a rationale that explains why
Democrats would want to destroy small businesses. Leaders or voters,
it doesn't matter, the assertion is insane.
>>>> > He's trying to get a power which isn't rein checked by Congress.
>>>> ^^^^?
>>>> > Small businesses are screwed; that seems to be the target of the Dem.
>>>> > leadership.
>>>>
>>>> Wow, you sound like such an idiot with this stuff!
>>>>
>>>> Why, in your mind, do you think the Democrats want to screw small
>>>> business?
>>>>
>>>
>>> Because they're successful and not dependent on the government for handouts.
>>
>> So, you think that answers "why"?
>>
>> It doesn't.
>>
>> And it's stupid.
>>
>> Sorry to be insulting, but having voted Democrat a few times,
>> and not wanting to destroy any business big or small, I take exception.
>>
>
> When we say "The Democrats" want something or think something, we're
> talking about the 'leadership'. You can think and feel whatever you
> want, but it's their opinions that count.
What "we" kimosabe. The proper pronoun for you is "I".
And nobody but a few loonies think that "democrats want to ban guns[*]"
or "democrats want to destroy small business" or on the other side that
"republicans want to eat babies" or "republicans hate homosexuals".
And only an idiot thinks that an extra $3k/year in taxes for a small business
clearing $250000 in profit per year will "destroy small business".
Nice to see you've put yourself into the Rush Limburger support camp.
scott
[*] Some wish to eliminate future sales of assault weapons to civilians, for which
there is some justification.
> The Romans managed it for 130 years, then family loyalty trumped
> public welfare.
I am not sure where you got that from. The adoptive Emperors lasted
three generations. After Nero the Emperors were family for two or three
at the most before either running out of blood heirs or being usurped.
The Empire was fairly stable apart from the occasional civil war but
turnover at the top was extreme. According to Seton the only
Julio-Claudian Emperors to die of natural causes were Augustus and
possibly Tiberius.
>> Hasn't worked like that in the great democracys for a hell of a long time
>> now.
>
> No? Tell me how it's different here in the USA. We don't get to choose
> the candidates. We don't get oversight on the voting. We don't get to
> vote on laws as a rule, and when we do (California prop 8), the courts
> are as likely to throw out "our" will. So?
The problem with letting the people vote, is that they can vote for anything,
even when it is prohibited by the Bill of Rights. That's what the courts
are _for_ to balance the will of the people with the prinicples of the founders.
It's pretty clear that Prop 8 violates the US constitution[*], as we'll see next
summer.
If Proposition 9, for example, required all republicans to leave the state, and
it passed by the "will of the people", does that make it right?
[*] It already has been shown to violate the California constitution.
>>>> >> "Oh, that is all well and good, but, voice or no voice, the people
>>>> >> can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy.
>>>> >> All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked
>>>> >
>>>> > Doesn’t work when they know that they arent being attacked.
>>>
>>> Rod - you're arguing with someone who's been dead for over 60
>>> years.
>>>
>>
>> Whatever else you can say, Der dicke Hermann was a smart cookie.
>
> For sure, the best demonstration of the truth of his statements
> there IME was in England when the Falklands war happened. A year earlier
> Argentina was the place the beef came from, and the Falklands were unheard
> of. Suddenly the entire country came over all patriotic and enthused with a
> need to bash the Argies and protect "our people" in the Falklands. The
> speed at which war fever spread and the extent to which it spread was eye
> opening.
>
> Note well, I make no comment here as to the importance or otherwise
> of the Falklands war. I simply observe that, in a country that hadn't known
> war for nearly forty years, war fever was easily achieved over a spot of
> land hardly anyone had even heard of.
>
The forty years had better be Argentina, you have to go back to the
1730s to find a decade in which Britain was not at war. The Aden
Emergency and the Dhofar Rebellion had kept the British Army busy in the
60s and 70s.
< http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_involving_Great_Br itain>
look at the 1603-1629 period ... aka last sentence in the 1st paragraph
of the period.
CBO has last decade decrease in tax revenue of $6T (compared to baseline
which had all federal debt retired by 2010) and increase in spending of
$6T (compared to baseline) for a $12T budget gap (much of that momentum
continues today) most of it occuring after congress allowed fiscal
responsibility act to expire in 2002 ... which required spending match
revenue. in the middle of last decade, us comptroller general would
include in speeches references to nobody in congress was capable of
middle school arithmetic (for what they were doing to the budget).
something over $2T of the increase in spending last decade went to DOD
.... little over $1T appropriated for the two wars and there is little or
nothing to show for the other trillion (or even where it went). the
total life-cycle costs for the two wars is estimated to be over $5T
(taking into account long term veterens benefits and health care costs).
there are all sorts of terrorist activities in the two wars occuring
nearly every day with significant lost of life (including thousands of
americans) ... having relatively little press coverage (number of
lines/minutes of press coverage per death).
even showing uptic after SOX ... in theory, at least after SOX (passed
in the wake of Enron&Worldcom supposedly to prevent it in the future),
all the executives and the auditors should be doing jail time. similar:
Too-big-to-fail and moral hazard has also morphed into too-big-to-jail
with references to the drug cartel money laundering turning Mexico into
Columbia and major factor in upswing in cartel related violence (also
number of lines/minutes of press coverage per death).
>> the problem with Communism and its variants is that the workers
>> have to be monitored by enforers to keep working. With capitalism,
>> the workers have an incentive to keep working.
>
> Actually, in both systems some workers are motivate and some are not.
> There is an external incentive to keep working only if there is some
> sort of monitoring. Don't confuse communism with soviet style
> marxist-leninism; the latter is state capitalism, despite the spin
> doctors.
Do you remember when the USSR sent its soldiers out to harvest potatoes?
>
>> Even in Israel, the collectives don't work as hard as the farmers
>> who own their own farm and products.
>
> Actually, they do. The significant variable is not individual versus
> collective ownership, but how much of a surplus is available. Also
> note that an employee doesn't have the same incentives as an owner,
> whether that owner be an individual or a collective.
>
The books I read talked about the collectives not working a long day;
OTOH the farmer who owned his own property, would work 12-15 or more
hours a day. The difference was personal ownership. I don't
remember the books' titles and they're still packed in boxes. Just
knowing human nature would give you a hint.
>>>> > Completely off with the fucking fairys, as always with your politics.
>>>>
>>>> the problem with Communism and its variants is that the workers have
>>>> to be monitored by enforers to keep working. With capitalism, the
>>>> workers have an incentive to keep working.
>>>>
>>>> this is especially true with farming. If you own the farm, you reap
>>>> the profits, literally. Even in Israel, the collectives don't work
>>>> as hard as the farmers who own their own farm and products.
>>>
>>> enter long message about who really owns the land in Israel.
>>
>>
>> Which tends to ignore the land purchased in the 50s and 60s and
>> the areas gained becuase they won the wars.
>>
>> /BAH
>
> Israeli Jews have legal title to about 5% of the land of even pre-1961
> Israel.. Palestinian sources.
>
>
You use today's defintion of legal title after a democratic process
of ownership has been put into place. I really doon't wnat
to get into another discussion about this with you.
>> Is it just me, or does this slop get worse every release?
>
> I don't know; I don't do windoze.
I went to the brick/mortar store to take a look. I didn't
have much energy so I only played with the interface for a
couple of minutes. I still haven't decided if it's worse
than an one-balled mouse or not. I'll have to play a little
bit more. I certainly could not find much of anything
to play with even though there were a couple dozen icons
or WTH they call them these days. The delay of movement
was perceptible and annoying.
>> Wow, you sound like such an idiot with this stuff!
>>
>> Why, in your mind, do you think the Democrats want to screw small
>> business?
>>
> BEcause they want to tax the shit out of small business owners.
Please point out one single democrat in a leadership position
that has _ever_ under any circumstances, stated that. Of course,
since no democrat has ever stated this, you'll be unable to.
In any case, raising the taxes on folks earning > 250,000 per year
to the same rates that existed prior to 2002, will in no case
cause the "destruction of small business"; nor with the exception of a
couple of vocal republican idiots who happen to own small businesses[*],
will it have any perceptable effect on employment by small business.
> Before you reply to this, go read Schedule C of the IRS' tax
> forms/directions.
Last I knew, the IRS wrote Schedule C, not the democrats; and it
is based on close to 100 years of lawmaking by both parties.
scott
[*] Including the fool that committed suicide after the president was
re-elected.
>>> He's trying to get a power which isn't rein checked by Congress.
>> ^^^^?
>
> Rein as in horse reins; some bridles have a rein check which keeps the head
> of the horse in front of you.
>
>>> Small businesses are screwed; that seems to be the target of the Dem.
>>> leadership.
>>
>> Wow, you sound like such an idiot with this stuff!
>>
>> Why, in your mind, do you think the Democrats want to screw small
>> business?
>>
> BEcause they want to tax the shit out of small business owners.
> Before you reply to this, go read Schedule C of the IRS' tax
> forms/directions.
>
It is probably a good read but also work though how much gross
revenue they need to generated before any form of taxes are significant.
I don't remember a single business decision I have made where taxes
was the determining factor to proceed.
The biggest impact on employment generated by small businesses
that government can make is infrastructure. A unified infrastructure,
roads, transportation of goods, product standards, and
communication are all the life blood of small business activity and
marketing. Educated employees, access to raw materials and markets
makes a real difference.
Real debate on productivity needs to happen. If private industry is
so good how come a product can be made at a profit in China
and shipped to the US for less than it can be manufactured in
the US. Wages are often cited as the problem but is it possible
that the current expectations of GMROI a far higher number is a
bigger problem for sustained growth. This is especially true with
investment capital available at a historic low of 1 or 2%
>>>> Human nature being what it is, a workforce needs _both_ enforcers and
>>>> incentives. One or the other alone won't do it, despite ideological
>>>> claims.
>>>
>>> 4 for each worker?? That's paying 5 people to do one job and doesn't
>>> include any of the management.
>>
>>
>> Where do you get "4 for each worker???
>
> Form the white paper I read about North Korea. It's packed away so
> I can't give you the book's specs.
One has to suspect that counts all the soldiers in the army vs. all
the farmers, not soldiers actually standing there watching the
farmers. Which, even though North Korea has an enormous army for its
size, probably isn't that different a ratio from the US, if you count
all our mercenaries, military contractors, and "contractors" as
soldiers (North Korea hasn't discovered "outsourcing" yet).
>>> He's trying to get a power which isn't rein checked by Congress.
>> ^^^^?
>
> Rein as in horse reins; some bridles have a rein check which keeps the
> head
> of the horse in front of you.
>
>>> Small businesses are screwed; that seems to be the target of the Dem.
>>> leadership.
>>
>> Wow, you sound like such an idiot with this stuff!
>>
>> Why, in your mind, do you think the Democrats want to screw small
>> business?
> BEcause they want to tax the shit out of small business owners.
Another Limbaugh lie mindlessly respouted.
$3K/per year in taxes on an operation with a taxable income
of $250K is nothing even remotely resembling anything like
screwing anyone, just getting them to pay a bit more tax at
a time of an immense deficit.
> Before you reply to this, go read Schedule C of the IRS' tax
> forms/directions.
Doesn’t do anything like you so mindlessly claimed.
>>>> > He's trying to get a power which isn't rein checked by Congress.
>>>> ^^^^?
>>>> > Small businesses are screwed; that seems to be the target of the Dem.
>>>> > leadership.
>>>>
>>>> Wow, you sound like such an idiot with this stuff!
>>>>
>>>> Why, in your mind, do you think the Democrats want to screw small
>>>> business?
>>>>
>>>
>>> Because they're successful and not dependent on the government for
>>> handouts.
>>
>> Mindlessly silly. Even the stupidest Dem realises
>> that that's where the bulk of employment is.
>
> And gaining control of that employment
Not even possible by screwing small business.
> will help further their agenda of socialism.
You wouldn’t know what real socialism was if it
bit you on your lard arse.
You have benefitted from socialism yourself,
most obviously with public librarys, the govt
school system you attended, social security,
etc etc etc and still do in spades.
"sam" <sam@nospam.com> writes:
> Just like when the Japs were actually stupid enough to do Pearl
> Harbor, fuckwit.
for the fun of it ... one of the lines was with the attack on Pearl
Harbor met that US wasn't coming to the assistance to some other attacks
going on (but hasten US entry into the war)
Pearl Harbor and the Fall of Singapore: 70 years ago these huge military
disasters shook both Britain and America, but they conceal a secret so
shocking it has remained hidden ever since. This landmark film by Paul
Elston tells the incredible story of how it was the British who gave the
Japanese the knowhow to take out Pearl Harbor and capture Singapore. For
19 years before the fall of Singapore to the Japanese, British officers
were spying for Japan. Worse still, the Japanese had infiltrated the
very heart of the British establishment - through a mole who was a peer
of the realm known to Churchill himself.
The Generals: American Military Command from World War II to Today
www.amazon.com/The-Generals-American-Military-ebook/dp/B007V 65TAM/
pg90/loc1328-32 "What was astonishing was the speed with which the
Americans adapted themselves to modern warfare," the most famous German
general of the war, Field Marshal Erwin Rommel, commented. "The
Americans, it is fair to say, profited far more than the British from
their experience in Africa, thus confirming the axiom that education is
easier than re-education." Another German officer, Maj. Gen. Friedrich
von Mellenthin, wrote, even more explicitly, "I don't think the British
ever solved the problem of mobile warfare in open desert. In general the
British method of making war is slow, rigid and methodical."
.... snip ...
--
virtualization experience starting Jan1968, online at home since Mar1970
Members
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
