Separate names with a comma.
Wanting to join the rest of our members? Feel free to sign up today.
Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by Podgie, Feb 10, 2010.
Hating humanity does nothing to improve it.
Unbiased global holocaust. Just let the earth start over by itself.
Fuck humnity - to quote Bill Hicks, "We're a virus with shoes".
So you'd be willing to end your own life then? As well as the lives of countless innocents?
Some of you might be able to appreciate this video
I didn't really understand the point of his argument. The development of the pencil is not purely because of the free market, and he didn't even justify why he thought that.
And the statement at the end, that the free market "fosters harmony and peace among the peoples of the world" is just ridiculous. If the viewer knew anything about American foreign policy, they'd know that America's free market is based on the exploitation and suffering of poorer nations.
Well look at countries with no free market whatsoever, the Soviet Union, China, North Korea, Cuba, so on, so on.
What great innovations have they brought to the world? NONE
Sure China had that really cool Olympic stadium but that's about it.
The free market is what has brought countless innovations, countless advances, and countless other things into the world.
The free market, in conjugation with free trade, CAN bring peace between two nations, and can advance others.
Look at the American relationship with China, we disagree on just about anything there is politically, we could go to war if we damn well pleased, but neither side will, because it would wreck the Chinese economy, and it would wreck the American economy. THAT'S how it can bring harmony.
Yeah there's horrible crap going on in China in terms of the labor force, but that's a result of a Government controlled market. It won't last for long however because China has been turning more and more towards the free market in order to SURVIVE.
Government intervention in the market system hurts people (I would say) more than a free market.
Ancient Greece and Egypt didn't have a free market, and they were amongst the most innovatives civilizations around.
The reason countries without a free market failed in recent years was because America and the rest of NATO used their global monopoly ,which the free market allowed, to make sure they suffered and failed. If free market countries were isolated from the rest of the world in the same way, the exact same would've happened to them.
I also disagree about how you said the free market creates peace and harmony. If this is true, then why doesn't the free market stop every other war involving free market countries? Because war is beneficial to the free market, so therefore the free market creates a vested interest for countries to go to war.
In fact, if you look at most wars, you see they are actually encouraged by the free market. A good recent example of this is the Iraq war.
Yes the free market does bring prosperity, but it is not sustainable and only a minority of the population of the world truly benefits from it, everyone else suffers.
The horrible crap in China caused by their government is vastly outweighed by the horrible crap in poorer nations caused by the free market.
As for your last point, I strongly disagreed.
My thoughts are quite incoherent and my mind isn't at it's best because I am suffering from concussion, so I apologise.
Government intervention DOES hurt people
Let's say that the government placed some huge carbon tax, and some refinery regulations on oil. This shoots the price of oil per barrel up, and ends up hurting people (in all countries) financially, and in their own homes. Government intervention is even what has led to the costs of healthcare to rise.
When you talk about wars between free market countries, I'd like to ask you which free market countries have been attacking each other, and I'd like to ask you which poorer nations truly have a free market.
I can give you examples of places with a free market that are doing absolutely wonderful: Switzerland and Hong Kong
I can give you examples of places with no free market that are doing horribly: India and North Korea.
I am keeping out of this one as I can see this becoming another Evile & Trivium fiasco
as long as the christians don't take over I'll be happy
How will you feel if it was the Muslums that took over?
I am genuinely curious
Why do you think Oil is so expensive in the first place? Because people are trying to make profits out of it. If Oil companies were nationalized, the prices of Oil would be much cheaper as there wouldn't need to be executives and CEOs making ridiculous amounts of money from it for no need (which lowers the wages of the workers and making oil more expensive, thus making everyone else in the country poorer)
You mentioned government intervention causing health care prices to rise. Well guess how much Governtment intervention has made our health care cost in the UK? Nothing.
When I was talking about wars, I was reffering to your example of free market countries attacking non free market countries such as China. Although the Free Market may stop wars between other free market countries (in the same way that socialist countries do not attack each other), it causes the free market countries to attack countries who do not benefit from the free market. A good mainstream example of this is the Iraq war. If there was no free market, Oil and reconstruction companies would not have gained a huge influence in American foreign policy, and there would not have been motivation for the Iraq war.
As I've said before, the underlying philosophy of the free market system is that in order to benefit, you have to make more people suffer (that is actually the main philosophy behind capitalism and the "American dream"). Only the richest 1%, who have been allowed to own 95% of the wealth (I've lost my notes on this so I may be incorrect) because of free market exploitation, truly benefit from the system.
Even Switzerland has economic protectionalism in it's agriculture sector. I can give you examples of countries that do have Government intervention and are doing well, such as China, Japan, most of the EU and Brazil.
These countries were not affected by the 2009 banking crisis (which was caused by the free market, might I add) as much as free market countries such as the US.
The example you gave about India is not a good one. I have personally studied superpower geography and it is a widely accepted idea that India is considered to be the next International superpower after China. The problems in India such as poverty have been caused by free market multinational corporations exploiting the country. Coca Cola have been stealing there water, chemical companies have been polluting it, and causing health problems, and companies such as Nike have forced India inro employing child labour just to survive in a free market economy.
Yes, China where some villages don't even have water when the government can easily provide it. Japan where they had a DECADE long recession kept IN PLACE by GOVERNMENT INTERVENTION. Last time I checked, even the EU had taken some hits from the current recession.
Yes, the recession was caused by the free market, and could easily have been fixed by the free market at no cost to the taxpayer. If all those big banks that had made risky loans had failed, BETTER, SMARTER banks could have easily taken their place.
The problem in India is because the government doesn't allow even the slightest bit of entrepreneurship to flourish. India where you may never get your business through all of the red tape and regulations, as opposed to Hong Kong where you can set up a business in less than a day.
Did you read what I said about the US and China? I said it would destroy both nations' economies if there was a war. The result of a free market in America and free trade between both nations decimates the possibility of any war between America/NATO and China. The free market, and free trade, are far more reliable tools in achieving world peace than treaties and sanctions.
People in a free market society don't have to suffer, in a true free market society, you are free to further yourself if you have the desire to. There are always opportunities to get the hell out of your situation (poverty in America is a joke anyway, a small apartment, color TV, a fridge, running water, as opposed to people in countries like Angola, China and Viet Nam). Chris Gardner for example. Single father, dirt poor, occasionally homeless.
He's a fucking billionaire now thanks to the free market. If you live in poverty in socialist nations, you're fucked. There's no hope for you to move forward.
Seeing as how you mentioned Iraq, let's take a look at it shall we?
A socialist country, extremely impoverished, owes a lot of money to Kuwait after their war with Iran, instead of paying their debt, BAM, invasion.
War happens between socialist countries too. Need I also bring up the war between Viet Nam and Cambodia? Two Red Nations duking it out?
Name one war between two free market countries that has happened in the last five or six decades.
As someone who has studied the growth of China academically I'd like to make some points:
China has actually made some of the biggest improvements in combating poverty in recent years, winning the most UN awards for it. Like many countries, China is suffering from natural water issues, but they are taking great measures in combating this, such as the North-South water project, which is very costly.
When Hurricane Katrina wreaked havoc upon New Orleans the US government conducted the most disgracefully lazy relief effort. When China was hit by the 2008 Sichuan Earthquake the response was immediate, with their Premier arriving at the scene 90 minutes after it happened.
Most EU countries have been out of recesssion for a while as their government have taken action in controlling the economy. Sure there are recessions caused by poor government intervention, but there are far more caused by capitalist greed.
Surely it would have been better to mitigate the banking crisis with government intervention then to wait until it failed, with the expectation that better banks would take over?
You seem to think India's economy is failing. If we count PPP, India's economy is the 4th largest in the world. It is one of the world's fastest growing, and is predicted to quadruple from 2007 to 2020.
I would say the main reason there has been no war between the US and China is that there has been no need for one, not because of the free market. As I've said before, the free market offers incentive for countries such as America to invade weaker countries such as Iraq.
Yes, in a free market economy you are free to further yourself. At the expense at others. But the fact is, with the free market, unless you are particurlarly intelligent and devoid of morals, you have less of a chance of making yourself a success. Why? Because there is too much competition from much larger corporations who can easily destroy your business due to economies of scale.
And the example of poverty in America you gave isn't poverty. It is infact far worse than that, an alarming number of people are losing their homes, due to ridiculous banking schemes that should be made illegal. At least in a much poorer country you can build a shack (without someone claiming you are using their land), in the US, you have to sleep on the streets.
Since when was Iraq a socialist country? It was a fascist dictatorship.
The war in Cambodia you mentioned was actually between China and Vietnam. But still, I don't consider these countries truly socialist, and don't support them.
I admit there hasn't been many wars between free market countries. But where is the evidence that this is mainly down to the free market? I could just as well claim that this is due to other factors such as the fact countries with free markets have been allies historically.
Fuck 50 Cent. THIS is real hip-hop.
They don't want to come to my fuckin house either
These were shed last year. The ones currently in use are bigger.
The small one is from 4 year old a rattler. The big one is from a 3 year old Gaboon Viper.
I've actually been doing some research recently, and I'm still not convinced that 9/11 was an inside job.
I don't think it was either tbh man
All theorists really have are motives and evidence that they can't prove or show.