REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS

Capitalism starved as many people as Mao and Stalin combined. NOT PN

POSTED BY: SIGNYM
UPDATED: Wednesday, August 7, 2019 17:45
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 2568
PAGE 1 of 2

Saturday, July 3, 2010 6:07 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Discussed this before, in partial detail, as I posted massacre after genocide after atrocity, all committed in the name of "freedom"... but actually for the benefit of capitalism.

At the time, I touched on capitalism's complicity in causing starvation: the policies of the World Bank and IMF in deciding that some countries - like Haiti- would be "better off" serving as reservoirs of cheap labor, the devastating effects on local agriculture of "free trade", the interest that all corporations have in supporting corrupt leaders (that includes in the USA) which create massive poverty and desperation. Turns out, there's more.

Geezer, Wulf, and all you "free market" believers, read more if you dare be discomfited in your absolute belief that corporations are manna from heaven.

How Goldman Sachs Caused a 'Silent Mass Murder,' Gambling on Starvation in the Developing World
Quote:



By now, you probably think your opinion of Goldman Sachs and its swarm of Wall Street allies has rock-bottomed at raw loathing. You're wrong. There's more. It turns out that the most destructive of all their recent acts has barely been discussed at all. Here's the rest. This is the story of how some of the richest people in the world - Goldman, Deutsche Bank, the traders at Merrill Lynch, and more - have caused the starvation of some of the poorest people in the world.

It starts with an apparent mystery. At the end of 2006, food prices across the world started to rise, suddenly and stratospherically. Within a year, the price of wheat had shot up by 80 per cent, maize by 90 per cent, rice by 320 per cent. In a global jolt of hunger, 200 million people - mostly children - couldn't afford to get food any more, and sank into malnutrition or starvation. There were riots in more than 30 countries, and at least one government was violently overthrown. Then, in spring 2008, prices just as mysteriously fell back to their previous level. Jean Ziegler, the UN Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food, calls it "a silent mass murder", entirely due to "man-made actions."

yes, I remember this, because my broker was trying to get me interested in food commodities.. specifically DBA.... http://dbfunds.db.com/dba/index.aspx
Quote:

Earlier this year I was in Ethiopia, one of the worst-hit countries, and people there remember the food crisis as if they had been struck by a tsunami. "My children stopped growing," a woman my age called Abiba Getaneh, told me. "I felt like battery acid had been poured into my stomach as I starved. I took my two daughters out of school and got into debt. If it had gone on much longer, I think my baby would have died."

Most of the explanations we were given at the time have turned out to be false. It didn't happen because supply fell: the International Grain Council says global production of wheat actually increased during that period, for example. It isn't because demand grew either: as Professor Jayati Ghosh of the Centre for Economic Studies in New Delhi has shown, demand actually fell by 3 per cent. Other factors - like the rise of biofuels, and the spike in the oil price - made a contribution, but they aren't enough on their own to explain such a violent shift.

To understand the biggest cause, you have to plough through some concepts that will make your head ache - but not half as much as they made the poor world's stomachs ache.

For over a century, farmers in wealthy countries have been able to engage in a process where they protect themselves against risk. Farmer Giles can agree in January to sell his crop to a trader in August at a fixed price. If he has a great summer, he'll lose some cash, but if there's a lousy summer or the global price collapses, he'll do well from the deal. When this process was tightly regulated and only companies with a direct interest in the field could get involved, it worked.

Then, through the 1990s, Goldman Sachs and others lobbied hard and the regulations were abolished. Suddenly, these contracts were turned into "derivatives" that could be bought and sold among traders who had nothing to do with agriculture. A market in "food speculation" was born. So Farmer Giles still agrees to sell his crop in advance to a trader for £10,000. But now, that contract can be sold on to speculators, who treat the contract itself as an object of potential wealth. Goldman Sachs can buy it and sell it on for £20,000 to Deutsche Bank, who sell it on for £30,000 to Merrill Lynch - and on and on until it seems to bear almost no relationship to Farmer Giles's crop at all.

If this seems mystifying, it is. John Lanchester, in his superb guide to the world of finance, Whoops! Why Everybody Owes Everyone and No One Can Pay, explains: "Finance, like other forms of human behaviour, underwent a change in the 20th century, a shift equivalent to the emergence of modernism in the arts - a break with common sense, a turn towards self-referentiality and abstraction and notions that couldn't be explained in workaday English." Poetry found its break with realism when T S Eliot wrote "The Wasteland". Finance found its Wasteland moment in the 1970s, when it began to be dominated by complex financial instruments that even the people selling them didn't fully understand.

So what has this got to do with the bread on Abiba's plate? Until deregulation, the price for food was set by the forces of supply and demand for food itself. (This was already deeply imperfect: it left a billion people hungry.) But after deregulation, it was no longer just a market in food. It became, at the same time, a market in food contracts based on theoretical future crops - and the speculators drove the price through the roof.

Here's how it happened. In 2006, financial speculators like Goldmans pulled out of the collapsing US real estate market. They reckoned food prices would stay steady or rise while the rest of the economy tanked, so they switched their funds there. Suddenly, the world's frightened investors stampeded on to this ground. So while the supply and demand of food stayed pretty much the same, the supply and demand for derivatives based on food massively rose - which meant the all-rolled-into-one price shot up, and the starvation began. The bubble only burst in March 2008 when the situation got so bad in the US that the speculators had to slash their spending to cover their losses back home. When I asked Merrill Lynch's spokesman to comment on the charge of causing mass hunger, he said: "Huh. I didn't know about that." He later emailed to say: "I am going to decline comment." Deutsche Bank also refused to comment. Goldman Sachs were more detailed, saying they sold their index in early 2007 and pointing out that "serious analyses ... have concluded index funds did not cause a bubble in commodity futures prices", offering as evidence a statement by the OECD.

How do we know this is wrong? As Professor Ghosh points out, some vital crops are not traded on the futures markets, including millet, cassava, and potatoes. Their price rose a little during this period - but only a fraction as much as the ones affected by speculation. Her research shows that speculation was "the main cause" of the rise. So it has come to this. The world's wealthiest speculators set up a casino where the chips were the stomachs of hundreds of millions of innocent people. They gambled on increasing starvation, and won. Their Wasteland moment created a real wasteland. What does it say about our political and economic system that we can so casually inflict so much pain?

If we don't re-regulate, it is only a matter of time before this all happens again. How many people would it kill next time? The moves to restore the pre-1990s rules on commodities trading have been stunningly sluggish. In the US, the House has passed some regulation, but there are fears that the Senate - drenched in speculator-donations - may dilute it into meaninglessness. The EU is lagging far behind even this, while in Britain, where most of this "trade" takes place, advocacy groups are worried that David Cameron's government will block reform entirely to please his own friends and donors in the City.

Corruption reaches everywhere.
Quote:

Only one force can stop another speculation-starvation-bubble. The decent people in developed countries need to shout louder than the lobbyists from Goldman Sachs. The World Development Movement is launching a week of pressure this summer as crucial decisions on this are taken: text WDM to 82055 to find out what you can do.




NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, July 3, 2010 6:41 AM

WHOZIT


So companys want to kill the people who either work for them or buy there products? Who's going to make or buy there stuff?

FYI; Goldman Sachs gave mega bucks to Barry and the Democrats over the years, don't belive me, look it up.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, July 3, 2010 6:47 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Quote:

Who's going to make or buy there stuff?
AHA! The man discovers the cause of economic depressions! And only 150 years late!

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, July 3, 2010 8:10 AM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up


Congratulations. You found that the man the Daily Telegraph considers "...one of the most influential people on the left in Britain." thinks capitalism is at fault. Isn't that sorta like the old "To a man with a hammer, every problem is a nail" cliche?

Depending on your bent, you can find someone to state authoritatively that starvation is caused by pretty much anything you want it to be.

It could be:

Bad Policy.
http://www.policynetwork.net/environment/media/famine-also-caused-bad-
policies


Corruption In Government.
http://www.alrc.net/doc/mainfile.php/alrc_statements/417/

Socialism.
http://democraticpeace.wordpress.com/2009/06/13/impoverishment-by-the-
left
/

Planned Economies.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/06/18/AR2010
061802837.html


Energy prices.
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/Skyrocketing_energy_prices_c
aused_mass_starvation_in_the_1970s_too.html


Global Warming.
http://globalwarming.com/2009/03/secondary-effects-of-global-warming/

Global Cooling
http://www.uncommondescent.com/off-topic/global-warming-rage-fuels-glo
bal-starvation
/

Global Dimming.
www.globalissues.org/article/529/global-dimming

Meat Consumption
http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x81vd6_food-crisis-caused-by-meat-con
sumpt


Running Out of Petroleum.
http://www.culturechange.org/cms/content/view/610/66/

Biofuel Scam.
http://www.ladyclip.com/videos/play/103938627/

Rats.
http://www.gfa.org/news/articles/rats-causing-famine-in-myanmar/

God's Wrath.
http://www.godhatestheworld.com/ethiopia/godswrath.html



"Keep the Shiny side up"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, July 3, 2010 9:19 AM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


That's the most convoluted, intellectually bankrupt and mindless bit of nonsense devised by - anyone.

It fits right along w/ this nonsense...






NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, July 3, 2010 9:38 AM

FREMDFIRMA



Lemme boil it down for the morons, Siggy.

Capitalism = import the loot, export the waste and consequences.

Basically a form of Piracy, always has been.
It is what it is - and that's WHY I use a very different set of terms, that's WHY I say "private enterprise" instead of "free market" cause that "free market" has been backed by government guns and monopoly sponsorship and support since the fuckin Whiskey Rebellion, and brought of the horror of a Civil War besides.

Tell me, do you have a CHOICE in your local power company, is there ANY COMPETITION WHATSOEVER, do you have any real control over the rate you pay ?

Or is it a state-backed monopoly with a little baksheesh on the side in exchange for not being too obviously rapacious, well, on your bill at least, they suck the rest up outta tax breaks and grants and all kinds of shit which if they DID put on your bill where you could see it, would start a pocket revolt in short order.

Fuck Capitalism, for it is The Blind God.

-Frem

I do not serve the Blind God.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, July 3, 2010 9:41 AM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


Capitalism and freedom go hand in hand.

Those who are against either are basically scum of the Earth.

Period.




NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, July 3, 2010 9:50 AM

HKCAVALIER


Signy, I respectfully disagree: PN DID starve as many people as Mao and Stalin combined!

HKCavalier

Hey, hey, hey, don't be mean. We don't have to be mean, because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, July 3, 2010 10:03 AM

JONGSSTRAW


Signy has for years maintained a consistent love of socialism and a hatred of capitalism. Those gents in the title also lined millions of their own citizens up against the wall and had them shot. To even try to compare an economic system to those two ruthless beasts in any way seems silly and desperate.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, July 3, 2010 10:44 AM

HKCAVALIER


Isn't the comparison being made between consequences (number of people starved to death), not so much intentions or innate character? Signy's hatred is due to the former and only secondarily leads her to presume upon the latter, no? If the consequences of a thing are so heinous, in time is it not natural to doubt the intentions of those who practice it?

HKCavalier

Hey, hey, hey, don't be mean. We don't have to be mean, because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, July 3, 2010 10:52 AM

DREAMTROVE


Frem

And socialism ISN'T??!?


Thank you sig for being willing to discuss this at all. I'm sure that the right wins this one hands down, but first let me say this:

Capitalism is an inherently corrupt system. It's in the name "capital." the capital in capitalism refers to the extant capital which measures the power within the system. Since around 2000 BC this has existed in a persistent form, which means that the wealthy families and concerns to pass on their power generation adore generation to create power bases who did no work themselves to acquire their power, because they could inherit. Henry Ford really nailed this one, and went into far more depth about it than I care to.

A true free market would be balanced, decentralized, and base on merit, and would rapidly erode any persistent capital within the system.

In the persistent system, the new moneyed classes can use their wealth to take over and control other concerns, (especially after clintons deregulation.) such super-concerns can become imperialist monopolies, knocking out corporations and trying to lock citizens into using their services, and paying their fees, and in an absolute monopoly, set the fees and conditions how they see fit. If we carry this to the absurd extreme, a theoretical super-monopoly could influence govt not just to favor their business, but to force everyone to be their customers. In such a situation, there would be no recourse, and people could be forced to patronize said concern, pay what it asked, and be punished, even killed for failing to obey. The concern could repeal any environmental or civil liberties statute by order of it's board through the politicians allied with the concern, provided there were no other competing concerns. Without any competition at all, there would be just one super-monopoly of everything. It would be able to take what it wanted, and do as it pleased. Laws that stood in its way would be neutralized. Financial concerns absorbed or shut down, the environment raped, and the people enslaved or killed.


Socialism IS that super-monopoly. It appoints itself absolute with all of the power that this implies. It is the automatically the hypothetical worst case of capitalism. If those are the only two options, the choice is obvious.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, July 3, 2010 11:06 AM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up


Quote:

Originally posted by Fremdfirma:

Lemme boil it down for the morons, Siggy.

Capitalism = import the loot, export the waste and consequences.




Strange. No definition of capitalism I can find in standard reference is similar to this.

Merriam-Webster:
an economic system characterized by private or corporate ownership of capital goods, by investments that are determined by private decision, and by prices, production, and the distribution of goods that are determined mainly by competition in a free market

Worldwebnet:
an economic system based on private ownership of capital.

Wikipedia:
Capitalism is an economic system in which the means of production are privately owned; supply, demand, price, distribution, and investments are determined mainly by private decisions in the free market, rather than through a planned economy; and profit is distributed to owners who invest in businesses. Capitalism also refers to the process of capital accumulation.

Economics Glossary:
Economic system in which property is privately owned and goods are privately produced.It is sometimes referred to as the private enterprise system.

UConn:
an economic (not political or governmental) system that favors and requires a free market, competition, and private (as opposed to governmental) ownership of the means of production (i.e., businesses). Capitalism is encouraged among developed countries because it harnesses competition, innovation, and consumer spending to fuel economic growth. Capitalism is sometimes resisted in lesser developed countries (LDCs) because poverty and corruption often prevent capitalism from working properly and, it is felt by some, often makes these conditions worse.

Quote:

Basically a form of Piracy, always has been.
It is what it is - and that's WHY I use a very different set of terms, that's WHY I say "private enterprise" instead of "free market" cause that "free market" has been backed by government guns and monopoly sponsorship and support since the fuckin Whiskey Rebellion, and brought of the horror of a Civil War besides.


Nor is backing by government and guns Capitalism. It's government.

Quote:

Tell me, do you have a CHOICE in your local power company, is there ANY COMPETITION WHATSOEVER, do you have any real control over the rate you pay ?
Or is it a state-backed monopoly with a little baksheesh on the side in exchange for not being too obviously rapacious, well, on your bill at least, they suck the rest up outta tax breaks and grants and all kinds of shit which if they DID put on your bill where you could see it, would start a pocket revolt in short order.


State-backed monopoly - or state-owned monopoly, isn't capitalism. If anything, it's - by the old book definition - Socialism; ownership of the means of production by the state.

BTW. Does anyone have capital - money or goods - invested in your security outfit? If so, then they're capitalists, by most any standard definition.

"Keep the Shiny side up"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, July 3, 2010 11:18 AM

AGENTROUKA


Quote:

Originally posted by dreamtrove:
If those are the only two options, the choice is obvious.



They aren't the only two options, though, are they?

While the title of the thread may be overtly confrontational, the quoted article merely asks for more regulation, which seems like a good response.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, July 3, 2010 12:06 PM

DREAMTROVE


Rouka

Agreed. But the spin is incorrect, Geezer is right. The idea that Cameron is the greatest threat to the world's poor is absurd.

Heres a little side story: what we have here is a situation in Ethiopia. It's not new. It's been like that for decades. The recent Ethiopian problem was directly caused by hhe implementation by the communist govt. If ethiopia of a plan which was created by Chairman Mao for centralized food distribution, a plan abandoned in china because of the adverse effects on the population, effects which critics say that the govt. Of Ethiopia Actually wanted to create, as another genocide on minor it populations in ethiopia, their sixth such holocaust since the first communist revolution (soviet socialist) overthrew haile selassie, later overthrown by Chinese communists in the early 1990s.

What bugs me is that anyone can look at a true disaster of socialism like Ethiopia and say " this is capitalism, we need socialism!" either doesn't unrstand the nature of the problem, is stone stupid, or is lying.

I agree with him on deregulation, but I sincerely doubt that speculators had any effect on the global food supply. Central food distribution programs are almost always to blame here, and while I credit the idea that globalists might try to implement such a thing on a world scale, however that is not the argument being presented here. The argument as it stands is not credible regardless of it's source.

I agree overall on the lack of choice. If there were additional choices they would be worth considering. Myself, I would prefer a different kind of free market. But new choices are not really part of the argument. It's a pro-socialist argument using a socialism created problem, trying to invert it, shift the blame, and then propose, ultimately. Socialism as a solution. It's an absurd exercise in circular logic.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, July 3, 2010 12:49 PM

DREAMTROVE


Sig,

Additionally, I have this issue with the story: it has to prove that the event happened at all before we can investigate any causes.

The story outlines an event that starts in late '06 and ends in early '08 which is to say almost the entire event took place in 2007.

That said, lets discount Ethiopia for two reasons: 1) the Ethiopian famine started in 2005 and went on to 2010' and 2) the famine has a known cause, the govt that ruled the country from 2005 to 2010 enacted a radical food control program. Being communist and not part of the free market we can basically rule out outside economic forces.

That said, I search on the famine of 2007, and I did not find this event. Here's some famine data I did find:

Share of hungry people in the developing world[8][9]
Year 1970 1980 1990 2005 2007
Xxxx 37 % 28 % 20 % 16 % 17 %

not convinced this worldwide event actually happened.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, July 3, 2010 1:31 PM

ANTIMASON


capitalism, in itself, doesnt garauntee liberty, freedom, or prosperity. look at China, its a communist regime with a relatively capitalist business climate. did capitalism insure political freedom? no. but as a mechanism of the market, it was sufficient to bring millions of people out of deep, grinding poverty. on the other hand, show me an affluent, prosperous, or even relatively free soceity that is not capitalist?

id like to know what your alternative to capitalism is. to me, there is no greater principle then voluntary, mutual consent- the foundation of capitalism. show me an example of a command and control society that has allowed for greater prosperity, and given the avg human being a greater standard of living then capitlaism? it doesnt exist

so on this 4th of July, you liberty haters can take your views of coercion and central planning, and stick'em where the sun dont shine


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, July 3, 2010 1:59 PM

DREAMTROVE


Antimason

Agreed, but I would say, the free market economy.

Capitalism can exist without a free market. The world bank is not a free market, nor is the federal reserve, or the IMF, yet they are all capitalist. If I had to define capitalism I would say, besides reliant on capital, it is a system in which ownership is defined in monetary dollar terms. This does allow the issuers of currency to own other peoples ideas. I think my economic model would be more distributist meritocracy, with ownership determined by property rights, not capital leverage. In short, I'd end the buyout.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, July 3, 2010 1:59 PM

DREAMTROVE


Antimason

Agreed, but I would say, the free market economy.

Capitalism can exist without a free market. The world bank is not a free market, nor is the federal reserve, or the IMF, yet they are all capitalist. If I had to define capitalism I would say, besides reliant on capital, it is a system in which ownership is defined in monetary dollar terms. This does allow the issuers of currency to own other peoples ideas. I think my economic model would be more distributist meritocracy, with ownership determined by property rights, not capital leverage. In short, I'd end the buyout.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, July 3, 2010 2:11 PM

FREMDFIRMA



What, and it never occurred to you WHY imma Kropotkinist-Anarchist there, DT ?

As for putting a spike in the primary flaw of that religious philosophy known as Capitalism...

And I say religious philosophy cause yanno, in THEORY, it could work, if people weren't human, if nothing unexpected ever happened, if it were not possible to cheat the system, if, if, if...

But it sure as shit ain't never ever once worked that way in practice - a viable system has enough slack in it to account for stuff like that, which is the flaw of BOTH Keyesian and Austrian economics.

But if you wanted to put a spike in the worst flaw of capitalism, that's EASY...

Give money an expiration date - use it or lose it.
Say ninety days from coming into your possession, for example.

-Frem

I do not serve the Blind God.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, July 3, 2010 3:07 PM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up


Quote:

Originally posted by antimason:
capitalism, in itself, doesnt garauntee liberty, freedom, or prosperity. look at China, its a communist regime with a relatively capitalist business climate. did capitalism insure political freedom? no. but as a mechanism of the market, it was sufficient to bring millions of people out of deep, grinding poverty. on the other hand, show me an affluent, prosperous, or even relatively free soceity that is not capitalist?



Exactly.

The capitalist economic system is a tool, just like a bulldozer or a gun. It can be used for good or ill. Just because someone destroyed your local woods with a bulldozer, that doesn't make bulldozers as a class evil. Just because governments use guns to subjugate their citizens doesn't make guns evil.

Capitalism (unlike socialism, which by definition needs the government to be involved in ownership of the means of production) can operate in many governmental environments: democracy, monarchy, dictatorship, etc. It just needs the ability for folks to invest their capital - be it money, goods, land, etc. - in what they consider an enterprise that will give them a return on their investment. If government gets involved in such a way as to skew the odds of any particular group being successful, then it's government that is responsible for any wrongdoing that occurs.

"Keep the Shiny side up"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, July 3, 2010 5:04 PM

DREAMTROVE


Frem

Yeah, already there. I guess I just didn't post it here, including the religion part: in gold we trust. It is a religious belief. Gold doesn't really have value, and I'm damn sure that paper abstractly representing it or computer code abstractly representing paper doesn't. Ive come up with some real nice mechanisms for expiring money. One of the key elements is stealth. It can never appear that you are designing a superior economic system. If they don't shut you down they will use their extNt persistent capital to take over your new economic model.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, July 3, 2010 5:32 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Geezer, weren't you the one who supposed that the videos of cops beating peaceful protesters at the G20 could "somehow" be fake? So the run-up in food prices wasn't due to speculation, despite all evidence? Just like the crazy run-up in gas prices in 2008 wasn't due to speculation?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Brent_Spot_monthly.svg

Yeah. Right.

All you ever due is obfuscate, minimize, twist, and in general set aide obvious fact and common sense. Why should I... or anyone here... pay the slightest attention to your whinging and apologism, when you are clearly as unbalanced as rappy?

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, July 3, 2010 5:55 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


DT, I have discounted Ethiopia, because it was a specific example of a generalized phenomenon of agricultural speculation. But it WAS a generalized phenomenon. The runup agricultural commodity futures led to increased starvation and hunger, political instability (in India for example), the closing of borders to agricultural exports as governments tried to stabilize prices, etc etc.

I followed agricultural commodities and the fallout very closely during that period. I believed... and still do... that the dollar is going to drop, so I'm always on the lookout for alternate holdings. My opinion is that, as N American and European economic activity is moribund (due to regressive taxation and lack of planning) and that real investment is at a near standstill, the only way to "make money on money" is speculation. (That, and illegal activities.... the end stage of any economic depression). The trick is to be speculating in whatever it is the ultra-wealthy are speculating in, but to be there FIRST, not to get sold the leavings while the market collapses and the ultra-rich bail out.

So BTW here's a tip from me: Get out of the stock market.

But unlike rappy, I DO have a day job and a sick family, and I can't sit on a market 24-7 and play small swings. So I play the long waves: investments that will make good in a year or two or five, but I'm VERY flexible in my options. I did very well in real estate, foreign currency and gold. I'm currently looking into foreign real estate. I'm not naive, nor am I am all-theory newbie or a moony new-ager. Take it from me that I was tracking events because I was looking VERY CLOSELY at being one of the horrible futures speculators of the article, and the ONLY thing that stopped me was the timing.

The speculation was real, it was happening, and it led to horrible consequences.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, July 3, 2010 5:59 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Quote:

Signy has for years maintained a consistent love of socialism and a hatred of capitalism.
Being anti-capitalist doesn't necessarily mean being pro-socialist. I have started many many threads about doing something different. I'm sorely disappointed that you would have forgotten. I thought you were more of a realist than that.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, July 3, 2010 6:34 PM

PIRATENEWS

John Lee, conspiracy therapist at Hollywood award-winner History Channel-mocked SNL-spoofed PirateNew.org wooHOO!!!!!!


"Capitalism" is defined as MONEYISM, or rather, loaning money at interest. Banking/usuary/loansharking are illegal according to Christian and Islamix law.

"Money" is no longer defined as silver or gold, but is now counterfeit paper -- or keystrokes on a computer -- "printed" by private central banks then loaned to govt at interest, via unconstitutional unratified "laws" passed at midnight on pagan Christmas holiday.

Capitalism is the antithesis and enemy of Industrialism, as Henry Ford pointed out.

Ford also pointed out the Khazar AshkeNazi European fake-jews own the banks that are destroying the world for a global fascist/communist/jewish dictatorship to enslave the planet. Ford included the Protocols of Zion with every Model T, later for sale at Walmart.
http://www.biblebelievers.org.au/intern_jew.htm

Today the jewish owners of the private "Federal" Reserve Bank stole $30-trillion from Congress, exported it offshore, and are refusing to loan it out, just like they did to cause the Great Depression.

The genocide of 95% of the human race has begun, with 100-million murdered in USA since 1973...




"Maintain humanity under 500,000,000."
http://www.google.com/search?q=georgia%20guidestones&um=1&hl=en&ie=UTF
-8&sa=N&tab=iw



NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, July 3, 2010 6:47 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Well, maybe this will screw with a few people's heads. Wulfie child, ready for some reading?
Quote:

The problem with the current mode of thinking is it assumes lower pay for employees is equal to more money for the business. This kind of thinking is flawed in that the employee IS the “consumer.” The greatest period of economic expansion came when labor laws allowed the Workers a taste of the Wealth they create. This is not Marxist unionist propaganda it is a Capitalist fact.

If the core of Capitalism is self interest (greed) why should the worker be any less greedy than the Capitalist? Marx wanted some sort of Utopia where fuzzy bunnies and happy kittens frolic and people work all day for the good of the collective. Screw that. I’m in it for me. I’ll work my rear off to make you rich as long as you take me along for the ride. I am not pro-union because I think Socialism Rocks. I am pro-union because I think Capitalism Rocks and I am as greedy as the next guy. Maybe more so. I am not working to make you rich. I am working to make me rich and I want my share of the wealth I earn for you. Capitalist Greed. Consumer Greed. Worker Greed. It is all Capitalism to me. I am not going to give away money I deserve just because someone calls me a “Socialist.”


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, July 3, 2010 7:05 PM

FREMDFIRMA


Siggy, problem with THAT, is this...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_strikes

Who do the Corpies get to call in for reinforcements ?
The whole military might of the greatest military spender on the planet five times over.

That's why I hang with the Wobblies, although I don't necessarily agree with em all the time, cause the worker is reduced to peon by the threat of the armys guns if they *DO* try to make an issue of it via force, and anything less gets outlawed, and lather rinse repeat...

Mondragon is a pretty good answer to both problems, but even that ain't perfect, nothin human is.

Still, every time you question "the way things are and will always be" - all you're gonna get from most people is...

"Crazy Eddie!"

-Frem

I do not serve the Blind God.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, July 3, 2010 8:33 PM

ANTHONYT

Freedom is Important because People are Important


"But if you wanted to put a spike in the worst flaw of capitalism, that's EASY...

Give money an expiration date - use it or lose it.
Say ninety days from coming into your possession, for example."

Hello,

Other than discouraging traditional savings, I don't think this will do much. Those who want non-perishable funds will simply invest in an item or commodity that they feel will have long-term resale value. Then they will hoard it for rainy days or retirement or large purchases.

Perishable money just seems wrong to my sensibilities. I want people to save. Why make it hard on them?

--Anthony





Due to the use of Naomi 3.3.2 Beta web filtering, the following people may need to private-message me if they wish to contact me: Auraptor, Kaneman, Piratenews, Wulfenstar. I apologize for the inconvenience.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, July 3, 2010 9:27 PM

DMAANLILEILTT


i think i see the two main flaws in capitalism:

1. it's involves PRIVATELY owned capital in a FREE market which means when corrupt people gain control of the private capital they can do what they want with it and...

2. it involves money.

"I really am ruggedly handsome, aren't I?"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, July 4, 2010 1:41 AM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up


Quote:

Originally posted by SignyM:
Geezer, weren't you the one who supposed that the videos of cops beating peaceful protesters at the G20 could "somehow" be fake?


I was responding to DT's comment about the video I posted:
"Are you certain about the order of events there? Or who set the fire?"

I noted that my video, and yours, could be fake.

Quote:

All you ever due is obfuscate, minimize, twist, and in general set aide obvious fact and common sense.

Or in other words, when you post only information from folks who agree 100% with your point of view (usually from un-cited fringe sources, BTW), I post your cites and follow up with cited information from general reference sources that cast doubt on or disprove your claims.

Quote:

Why should I... or anyone here... pay the slightest attention to your whinging and apologism, when you are clearly as unbalanced as rappy?

Because I generally respond with information, even if you don't like it, rather than immediately leaping to personal insults?

"Keep the Shiny side up"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, July 4, 2010 1:46 AM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up


Quote:

Originally posted by SignyM:
Well, maybe this will screw with a few people's heads. Wulfie child, ready for some reading?



Forgot that cite again, SignyM.

http://www.thefreemanonline.org/featured/capitalism-yes-and-no-2/#

Makes it easier to read the entire article, and know where it's coming from.

"Keep the Shiny side up"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, July 4, 2010 1:52 AM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up


Quote:

Originally posted by SignyM:
My opinion is that, as N American and European economic activity is moribund (due to regressive taxation and lack of planning) and that real investment is at a near standstill, the only way to "make money on money" is speculation. (That, and illegal activities.... the end stage of any economic depression). The trick is to be speculating in whatever it is the ultra-wealthy are speculating in, but to be there FIRST, not to get sold the leavings while the market collapses and the ultra-rich bail out.



So the reason you're mad at Goldman Sachs isn't that they proportedly starved a bunch of folks, but that you couldn't get in on the deal?

"Keep the Shiny side up"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, July 4, 2010 2:41 AM

DREAMTROVE


Sig

You have supported socialism over the years so its natural for people to make the supposition that when you say capitalism has to go your back to that old drum.

Ethiopias problems are definitely not a microcosm of a world event. They have a known local cause: the Maoist national food distribution system. Sure, the international prices for food may be higher than ones local to Africa, and the govt, communist though it was, might be looking to sell that food internationally, but this is hardly a new development. African countries have been exporting food for higher international prices for half a century, more if you count colonialism. And prices outside Africa have always been higher than prices inside Africa.

But this bring us back to square one. To make this augment, you first have to do two things:

1) the this event happened at all. I can find no outside references to it or statistical data showing an increase in famine during that period.

2) that it was caused by commodities speculation, and that short termj fluctuations in price resulted in long term policy shifts of governments that would lead them to export food.

It seems unlikely to me that speculators would even have an impact on prices this dramatically without any real world cause. I saw the charts, wnd yes, an international food indedx went up. I'm not sure that would cause a shift in local prices, or that that would cause a famine short of an opportunist government program which would deliberately sell food overseas rather than fee it's own people, a situation as I pointed out, which has been happening for a long time.

Im not saying that its entirely implausible, just that it looks like youre reaching. First thing you have to do is prove that the event happened at all.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, July 4, 2010 2:50 AM

DREAMTROVE


Quote:

Capitalism is the antithesis and enemy of Industrialism, as Henry Ford pointed out


Thanks John, that merited repeateing.

Wobblies?


The problem with money is the guy who mints it has an infinite supply and so owns everything.


The problem in ethiopia is not really economic, it's that the government wishes to exterminate it's ethnic minorities, and that has been the problem since the commies first took over in the late 70s.

Bring back the Kings. Kings of africa still exist, and still meet to discuss world issues, ut few of them hwve any power. The rapid turn over of power that comes with democracy or revolution leads to a radical increase in corruption, as the corrupt can much more easy remove the good leaders from power, and have more reason to do so.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, July 4, 2010 4:36 AM

ANTHONYT

Freedom is Important because People are Important


"Why should I... or anyone here... pay the slightest attention to your whinging and apologism, when you are clearly as unbalanced as rappy?"

Hello,

For the record, this man has never told me to go fuck myself long and hard for daring to disagree with him. He has never been anything but civil with me in his discourse, and has always attempted to provide a logical (even if not always correct) argument.

I do not find the comparison valid.

--Anthony





Due to the use of Naomi 3.3.2 Beta web filtering, the following people may need to private-message me if they wish to contact me: Auraptor, Kaneman, Piratenews, Wulfenstar. I apologize for the inconvenience.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, July 4, 2010 5:19 AM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up


Quote:

Originally posted by AnthonyT:


Hello,

For the record, this man has never told me to go fuck myself long and hard for daring to disagree with him. He has never been anything but civil with me in his discourse, and has always attempted to provide a logical (even if not always correct) argument.

I do not find the comparison valid.

--Anthony





And a tip of the Geezer hat.

"Keep the Shiny side up"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, July 4, 2010 5:59 AM

DREAMTROVE


Anthony is right, Geezer is pretty civil, perhaps overly so. He is also one of the more centrist members of the forum, so if his position looks way off on the horizon to someone, perhaps they should look to where they are standing to as to why it might look like that to them.

I personally don't have problems with Rap, whom I disagree with a lot. I think that some of the more extreme position holders should perhaps not waste their time debating opposing extreme position holders if nothing can conceivably be gained by the debate, and then the emotional outpouring could be shored down a little and more civil debates would progress.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, July 4, 2010 6:21 AM

KANEMAN


Quote:

Originally posted by Fremdfirma:

What, and it never occurred to you WHY imma Kropotkinist-Anarchist there, DT ?

As for putting a spike in the primary flaw of that religious philosophy known as Capitalism...

And I say religious philosophy cause yanno, in THEORY, it could work, if people weren't human, if nothing unexpected ever happened, if it were not possible to cheat the system, if, if, if...

But it sure as shit ain't never ever once worked that way in practice - a viable system has enough slack in it to account for stuff like that, which is the flaw of BOTH Keyesian and Austrian economics.

But if you wanted to put a spike in the worst flaw of capitalism, that's EASY...

Give money an expiration date - use it or lose it.
Say ninety days from coming into your possession, for example.

-Frem

I do not serve the Blind God.



Calling Capitalism a religion is about as far off as your earlier definition of capitalism(Geezer pointed out your hyperbolic absurd definition of capitalism...you must have felt retarded). Your blathering has risen lately to a crescendo that would make whales weep. Your opinion is becoming as irrelevant as Citizen's. Slow down, relax, and think through your tyraid before posting. Say something meaningful based in reality not useless metaphors and such. Your posts are making as much sense as an lain M. Banks novel....It's all in your head and is not real. Your perceptions are as clouded as the urine of a female with a UTI.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, July 4, 2010 7:49 AM

FREMDFIRMA


Oh issat so ?

And Politics is not, in itself the evolution of Religion past the divine ?

It is what it is, callin it something else will change nothing.

"Wobblies" = IWW, the one union that never took a knee, never bent over, and while at times disagreeable, holds to the principles instead of being a self-serving corporate pacification gesture.

It was Carnegie and Rockefeller who came up with the idea of the corps actually creating the unions and using them to sabotage and sandbag the workers while pacifying them by making it LOOK like they were accomplishing something cause it was cheaper than payin Pinkertons or Baldwin-Felts to slaughter anyone who didn't toe the line.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ludlow_Massacre

And anyone thinking todays unions have anything to do with workers rights is kinda laughable since the AFL-CIO and related orgs came out of the Sam Gompers (a notorious racist prick, part of why him and the IWW didn't get along) collective of government-sponsored strikebreakers who used "patriotism" as an excuse to BREAK IWW strikes when they realized refusing to feed the war machine would upset the balance of power in their favor - something Wilson found intolerable, and he bought off Gompers with a cushy cabinet position and then used the AF&L to crush the IWW, followed up by the first "Red Scare", the palmer raids, and all manner of bullshit in which workers rights were effectively destroyed in this country.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samuel_Gompers

And yes, the truth of it is that the "Red Scare" had SHIT to do with anything BUT crushing Labors threat to the corporate robber barons.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Red_Scare
(Look at the especially telling page illustration, for example)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palmer_Raids

And it showed that when the rules become inconvenient, the powers that be will simply ignore them, case in point the refusal to seat Berger.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Victor_L._Berger

So in light of the truth of our history, which you for damn sure won't be finding in corporate americas classrooms, the idea that economic america of the current day and age, or ANY day and age, was ever a "free market" is quite, quite laughable, hell, even when we kicked the british robber barons off our ass, all we really did in the end is replace them with a bunch of Federalist ones - all the way down the line.

Shit, ask yourself what Lincoln *DID* for a living prior to politics, he was a goddamn strongarm lawyer for the corpies, particularly the river monopolies and railroad robber barons!

You gotta remember folks, my ancestors spilled gallons of blood over this, from the battle of matewan to blair mountain, up to and including getting bombed by the us motherfuckin air force, to secure what piddly pathetic workers rights we have -
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Matewan
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Blair_Mountain

And all the while, especially today, hated, cussed about, and spit at for being "socialists" and "bomb throwing anarchists" and every other nasty thing, while those, like Gompers, who were ACTIVELY TRYING TO CRUSH THOSE RIGHTS, are held up as some kind of heros by bullshit propaganda and the insinuation that they were in some way responsible for those rights being gifted down from on high as a reward for bending the knee, behaving themselves and being good little bitches...

But that ain't how it went - those rights were torn violently from the teeth of the corporations in blood and thunder by MY ancestors, who are regarded today as villains and scumbags, while those standing against them are lauded as some kinda folk heros, fuck that.

And not like it stopped there either, hell, corporate america was SO fascism-friendly they kissed up to Franco even when they were fighting his buddies, cause they thought he had the right idea about what to do with those assholes who dared to, yanno, actually wanna get paid their fare share, actually get treated like humans...

And who wound up fighting EVERY GODDAMN BODY ON THE PLANET, with junk for weapons and almost no support whatever save for us american "traitors" who thought Facists and monsters like Franco belonged on the end of a rope instead of in the halls of power.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchist_Catalonia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abraham_Lincoln_Brigade

You learn a little HISTORY, you won't be damn fool enough to ever try to hand me that "free market" bullshit on the soil of THIS country, ever, ever again.

And usually I apply it to religion, but it works here as well...
Quote:

Every advance in human life, every scrap of knowledge and wisdom and decency we have has been torn by one side from the teeth of the other. Every little increase in human freedom has been fought over ferociously between those who want us to know more and be wiser and stronger, and those who want us to obey and be humble and submit.

The Subtle Knife - Philip Pullman

Intentions be damned, the IWW has been FIRMLY on the side of humanity even though it has all but destroyed them and left them little but a pale, bleeding, dessicated shadow of itself, and still they stand.

And I stand with em.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Industrial_Workers_of_the_World
http://www.iww.org/

-Frem

I do not serve the Blind God.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, July 4, 2010 8:50 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Quote:

Sig You have supported socialism over the years so its natural for people to make the supposition that when you say capitalism has to go your back to that old drum.
I have repeatedly supported workplace democracy and ownership by the workers. At times I have supported government action, when it appeared that only government action could solve a problem -for example, pollution which drifts from city to city and continent to continent.
Quote:

Anthony is right, Geezer is pretty civil, perhaps overly so. He is also one of the more centrist members of the forum
Don't mistake politeness for centrism. HE always... ALWAYS... supports jackboot capitalism. Not saying this lightly, but he always has an excuse as to why it's OK for us to overthrow democratically-elected governments and replace them with dictators who torture, rape, and massacre large portions of their population to protect and serve landowners, foreign corporations, banks and other wealthy elites. So when pictures show up of police macing and beating peaceful protesters, he wonders if somehow they are "fake", or what the protesters did to "deserve it".

DT, I used to think you were smart. What happened to you?
Quote:

For the record, this man has never told me to go fuck myself long and hard for daring to disagree with him.
He WILL, however, support people being billy-clubbed in a park. Ditto what I told DT. Geezer is polite. He also uses strawmanning and innuenndo to the point that makes me want to rip my hair out. For all of Geezer's politeness, he almost never argues honestly.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, July 4, 2010 12:28 PM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up


Quote:

Originally posted by SignyM:
Not saying this lightly, but he always has an excuse as to why it's OK for us to overthrow democratically-elected governments and replace them with dictators who torture, rape, and massacre large portions of their population to protect and serve landowners, foreign corporations, banks and other wealthy elites.


Well, if that's what you call showing that the folks you call DEMOCRATICALLY ELECTED PRESIDENTS were often actually dictators appointed by the previous dictators, winners of elections with one candidate, or collaborators with the Japanese during WWII - or providing quotes from folk you say the CIA overthrew saying the CIA had nothing with their removal from office...

Quote:

So when pictures show up of police macing and beating peaceful protesters, he wonders if somehow they are "fake", or what the protesters did to "deserve it".


I'd appreciate a cite of where I said peaceful protestors were maced or beaten because they "deserve it". Or that I "support people being billy-clubbed in a park". I believe that happened only in your mind.

On another point, guess I'll have to point out that, according to your posts above, you risk your capital in investments in the stock market or commodities market, hoping that the return on your investment will make you a profit. In other words, you're a Capitalist. Does this make you feel like a hypocrite?

"Keep the Shiny side up"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, July 4, 2010 12:58 PM

DREAMTROVE


Sig

You have mentioned socialism as a solution a couple times over the years, I'm glad you've backed off of hat position. It doesn't matter what the intentions of a group are if their effect is to create a central authority tat can be abused in that manner, they simply become the alliance/blue sun, govt and Corp faces of the same thing.

As for change? I dont think so. I never find myself having issues with geezer, I think this is a personal attack and should be shelved. Send him an email if you have a gripe.

Geezer,

You did say something to that effect ove the g20 protesters. The globalist jackboots were some of the scariest Nazis vie seen in a while, you lost some points with me for supporting them. Overall you're okay. Ah well, so it goes,

To both of you,

Keep the Shiny side up

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, July 4, 2010 3:41 PM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up


Quote:

Originally posted by dreamtrove:
Geezer,

You did say something to that effect ove the g20 protesters. The globalist jackboots were some of the scariest Nazis vie seen in a while, you lost some points with me for supporting them. Overall you're okay. Ah well, so it goes,



DT.

Please review my comments in the G20 thread here. http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.asp?b=18&t=43982

If you think any of this supports "globalist jackboots" instead of showing that there was right and wrong done by both sides, please point it out. I'd be interested to know what makes you think that.

"Keep the Shiny side up"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, July 4, 2010 4:18 PM

DMAANLILEILTT


no economic system can be totally perfect because it has people running it. capitalism will have the people eith the money calling the shots whereas a marxist system will mean the people on the bottom, who have no idea about how to successfully run a company and make money, will have control.

the only thing close to a "perfect" system would be a system run entirely by computer which had instaneous access to all information concerning economics and the ability to analyse them and come up with solutions that were equitable.

however, this would raise all sorts of ethical issues about whether a machene could be trusted with such a important task and whether we should even if it can.

"I really am ruggedly handsome, aren't I?"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, July 4, 2010 6:10 PM

DREAMTROVE


Geezer

I reviewed it again. It looked to me how it looked the first time.

You introduced anarchists causing damage to counter a story of jackboots squashing innocent peoplein a park. This does not logically follow that the behavior by the police would in any way be triggered by the vandalism.

It appears to be a fairly pro-jackboot position given the context.

I think the issue is not a light one: Police are not always in the position they are in our society. When the agenda and the ruling classes move to the extreme authoritarian, police become the arm of that authority, and supporting them becomes an authoritarian position.

The case here is the masked police in hoards and line enacting some tactics that Frem has names for, they've just ceased to be police, and have become storm troopers. They are defending the globalists, who are a fairly scary ruling elite, not the frequenters of common shops which were looted. The storm trooper behavior is not a result of this looting, because it was not created in response, it has to have been organized well in advance, tactics must be practiced, gear much be purchased, etc.

So, the Storm Trooper like jackboots are security for the globalists in the manner in which they respond. They are not acting as police responding to a crime of looting. No one would have arranged such a response. Esp. in Canada. But they could be security for the G20, and not having an exact time line.

When you provided this as a counterbalance, it certainly appears to me as if you were taking the side of the jackboots.

My feeling is that you are right, there are two sides, but they are not sides where normal people are acting normally or there is a normal back and forth. When the police don the jackboot attire and adopt the jackboot tactics, they are trying to not be people. They want to be a horde so that people cannot argue with them. They want to be faceless so that no one will see them as human, look them in the eye, or ask them to question what they are doing. That is because the human inside knows that what they are doing is inhuman. But at this point, the human inside is just a reactive set of muscles controlled by a nervous system which has pushed its humanity aside in favor of following its direct orders from a higher authority, and not a divine one, but the master they have just adopted.

The topic has come up a couple times ;)

Keep the Shiny side up

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, July 4, 2010 8:35 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Quote:

Well, if that's what you call showing that the folks you call DEMOCRATICALLY ELECTED PRESIDENTS were often actually dictators appointed by the previous dictators, winners of elections with one candidate, or collaborators with the Japanese during WWII - or providing quotes from folk you say the CIA overthrew saying the CIA had nothing with their removal from office...
Hmm... I posted at least a couple of dozen of examples of leaders that OTHERS called democratically-elected. Out of that couple of dozen, you had maybe two legitimate, specific objections. Now suddenly, through the magic power of innuendo, you paint a picture that ALL of those democratically-elected leaders (who we deposed and replaced with out-and-out tyrants) were somehow illegitimate to begin with?

Nice to know you haven't lost your touch.

Quote:

I'd appreciate a cite of where I said peaceful protestors were maced or beaten because they "deserve it". Or that I "support people being billy-clubbed in a park". I believe that happened only in your mind.
I believe DT answered you quite well on this point. But, yes, given the context, that is what you implied.

Quote:

On another point, guess I'll have to point out that, according to your posts above, you risk your capital in investments in the stock market or commodities market, hoping that the return on your investment will make you a profit. In other words, you're a Capitalist. Does this make you feel like a hypocrite?
Not at all.

Do you?

"Keep the Shiny side up"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, July 4, 2010 8:42 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


DT, I agree with you on some points, but I believe you're being naive about police.

Oh, and BTW... I don't believe I've ever advocated socialism, and I suggest that you go find a quote where I did. I believe in one thread, once, someone said If you HAD to choose between capitalism and socialism, and those were your only two choice, which would you pick? I picked socialism. But that wouldn't be my first choice, nor would I advocate it.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, July 4, 2010 8:43 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Quote:

no economic system can be totally perfect because it has people running it. capitalism will have the people eith the money calling the shots whereas a marxist system will mean the people on the bottom, who have no idea about how to successfully run a company and make money, will have control.
But the workers can learn how to run a company, while the owners would never give up their authority.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, July 5, 2010 3:20 AM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up


Quote:

Originally posted by dreamtrove:
Geezer

I reviewed it again. It looked to me how it looked the first time.

You introduced anarchists causing damage to counter a story of jackboots squashing innocent peoplein a park. This does not logically follow that the behavior by the police would in any way be triggered by the vandalism.


Never said it did. Just wanted to show that there was violence on both sides. I'm not sure how showing that some protestors resorted to violence as well as some police becomes a "pro-jackboot" position unless one believes that bad actions by police should be highlighted and bad actions by the protestors should be ignored.

Quote:

When you provided this as a counterbalance, it certainly appears to me as if you were taking the side of the jackboots.


Okay, so maybe you do believe that bad actions by police should be highlighted and bad actions by the protestors should be ignored.

Actually, I was taking the 'initiating violence is bad' side. I have no idea whether the police violence helped trigger the burning of cars and smashing of property, or whether the vandalism triggered the police violence, or whether both were entirely seperate. Both were aggression. If you want to point out the violence at G20, then it should all be exposed.

If you see what I said differently, I can't control that. Could be because of your point of view. Could be that some folks have used the "Big Lie" that I'm a supporter of the jackboots enough times that it skews your opinion.


"Keep the Shiny side up"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, July 5, 2010 3:33 AM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up


Quote:

Originally posted by SignyM:
Hmm... I posted at least a couple of dozen of examples of leaders that OTHERS called democratically-elected. Out of that couple of dozen, you had maybe two legitimate, specific objections. Now suddenly, through the magic power of innuendo, you paint a picture that ALL of those democratically-elected leaders (who we deposed and replaced with out-and-out tyrants) were somehow illegitimate to begin with?


I'd dispute that it was just two, probably quite a bit more, but it'd just be a rerun of the last thread. Not sure how 'often' morphs to 'ALL' either. If you recall (apparently not) I did agreed that some of the actions of our government in Central America (and perhaps other places in the Western Hemisphere) in the early 20th century were uncalled for.

But I understand you have your agenda, and anyone who's not 100% behind it is the enemy.

Quote:

"Does this make you feel like a hypocrite?"

Not at all.

Do you?



I'm not the one railing against the evil profiteering of Capitalism while at the same time hoping that the commodities shares I purchased with my capital will make me the largest profits possible. That would be you. Seems like a disconnect to me, but I'm sure you could explain it.

"Keep the Shiny side up"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

YOUR OPTIONS

NEW POSTS TODAY

USERPOST DATE

OTHER TOPICS

DISCUSSIONS
Dec 10, google begins The Purge; and other big tech nastiness. And gee, just before campaiging really starts ...
Fri, December 6, 2019 00:15 - 5 posts
In the garden, and RAIN!!!!
Fri, December 6, 2019 00:00 - 3439 posts
Another Putin Disaster
Thu, December 5, 2019 20:51 - 203 posts
IG report incoming...
Thu, December 5, 2019 20:51 - 123 posts
Countdown Clock to Trumps impeachment " STARTS"
Thu, December 5, 2019 18:58 - 3345 posts
Trump Is Destroying Everything He Touches
Thu, December 5, 2019 18:56 - 291 posts
Another delusion dispelled
Thu, December 5, 2019 13:42 - 24 posts
A thread for Democrats Only
Thu, December 5, 2019 12:22 - 2932 posts
Impeachment Investigation Is Underway, Judiciary Committee Says
Thu, December 5, 2019 12:15 - 1074 posts
Ukraine Recommits To NATO
Thu, December 5, 2019 07:51 - 20 posts
Russia wants to upend Western democracy
Thu, December 5, 2019 06:34 - 176 posts
Who Is Running In 2020?
Wed, December 4, 2019 17:34 - 350 posts

FFF.NET SOCIAL