StarGateWars Forums

marusai wrote:

Tollan Phoenix wrote:

mursai wrote:Everyone has a free will! How do you think would people of Czechoslovakia be able to demonstrate against the invasion of troops from Warsaw Pact if they had no free will?

Was that the protest broken up by the Soviet tanks and troops, or was that another one in Hungary? While we're discussing the right to assembly in countries that call themselves socialist, anyone want to discuss Tienaman's Square?

(Sorry about the spelling)

It was actually the army, which assembled first. Then a bunch of people went out on the streets and started throwing bricks and molotov coctails at them. It was quite peaceful, "only" 13 people have died. Usually in some accidents, because the troops havent fought them at all. If you compare it to how many people die in car accidents alone it makes it a negligible number.

@ Tollan and urogard
It's called TIAN-AN-MEN
Tiananmen

I'm tempted to laugh at the "only" part, if I didn't know that people died in riots everywhere. However, I'm going to agree with urogard by saying that you can't compare politics to economy. So, perhaps this should become a philosophical (is my spelling that bad, or is it just me?) debate on the pros and cons of each, because we can go back in forth on the wonders and 'wonders' of practiced socialism and capitalism.

And, as for the spelling, I said sorry because I knew I was spelling it wrong. Do you want me to go back and change it?

Tollan Phoenix wrote:

Apophis The Great wrote:I know that Texas is on the south, at the the west of Louisiane, not to mention Seattle is in Washington D.C.

Apophis, I know you mean well, but you just completely destroyed your credibility with an understandable oversight. There are two Washingtons, the city Washington D.C. (located on the Potomac River between Virginia and Maryland) and the state of Washington, located south of British Colombia, Canada (can't believe I had to check a map to make sure that was right )

Apophis the Grea wrote: ...I HIGHLY DOUBT MANY AMERICANS can do it for france, germany, italy cities and locate them, not even mentionning that nice CNN vid where they asked where Australia was, or maybe it was Iran? dont remember which country it was about, but it was not some Zambia or Bhutan which is hardly easy to locate on the map!!! Just to mention that they didnt even know that the big island in pacific ocean was called Australia...
So before saying those who thinks americans are ignorants are more, at least we know that America is under Canada and above Mexico!!! I KNOW there are intelligent americans, alot of, but the prob IS that they are alot in absolute, but in comparaison to the global population number, in relative, not so many! I'm pretty sure the democrats have LESS ignorants in their ranks, because the bush side isnt only made of those liberal workers who travel around the world, who surely know alot, but this party is made also by alot of ignorants, and no american inhabitant can deny it!!! Who are those ignorants? Those who say Canada s... France and Mexico s..., and who dont even know where are germany or india, finally who think America is their country, and any people with KNOWLEDGE will say, and CANNOT BE DENIED, that USA are Indian's country (not those from India, I mean those who lived in before The thirteen colonies were created).

Every country has it's idiots, or at least people who don't remember stuff. Actually, I think a new show called You Think You're Smarter Than a Fifth Grader? came out, where fifth graders competed with adults in trivia and often won. So yeah, a lot of Americans are ignorant. Blame the school systems. But did you think all 300 million of them would be brilliant? (BTW, I saw a movie similar to that. Some guy said the Berlin Wall was in Afghanistan )

And as for the Native American arguement you threw in at the last minute, there is no going back, so don't dredge up the past in this case (I had US History last year, the part on Native American treatment was an eye-opener, yet not unexpected).

LoL do you know where I'm from before taking fun of what I said about washington? English is my SECOND LANGUAGE, so I can mixup the city of Washington whos near Baltimore and the state above Oregon, not by what I meant, but how I say it. I would want to know if you know what is other country WITHOUT going to a map, that has a city called Montpellier, like the one in USA?

Apophis the Great wrote:LoL do you know where I'm from before taking fun of what I said about washington? English is my SECOND LANGUAGE, so I can mixup the city of Washington whos near Baltimore and the state above Oregon, not by what I meant, but how I say it. I would want to know if you know what is other country WITHOUT going to a map, that has a city called Montpellier, like the one in USA?

...sorry, I guess my post sounded patronizing. Not the intent, it's just whenever I hear someone's moving to Washington, the question of which Washington always comes up because there are two.

As for Montpellier... hmm...
I want to say France, because it has a French feel to it (the ie combination just screams France), but I woudn't be suprised if it's Dutch, since the Netherlands did colonize that region of the US.

Tollan Phoenix wrote:

Apophis the Great wrote:LoL do you know where I'm from before taking fun of what I said about washington? English is my SECOND LANGUAGE, so I can mixup the city of Washington whos near Baltimore and the state above Oregon, not by what I meant, but how I say it. I would want to know if you know what is other country WITHOUT going to a map, that has a city called Montpellier, like the one in USA?

...sorry, I guess my post sounded patronizing. Not the intent, it's just whenever I hear someone's moving to Washington, the question of which Washington always comes up because there are two.

As for Montpellier... hmm...
I want to say France, because it has a French feel to it (the ie combination just screams France), but I woudn't be suprised if it's Dutch, since the Netherlands did colonize that region of the US.

Well you're right, france, nice deducing I've to say

Apophis The Great wrote:

Tollan Phoenix wrote:

Apophis the Great wrote:LoL do you know where I'm from before taking fun of what I said about washington? English is my SECOND LANGUAGE, so I can mixup the city of Washington whos near Baltimore and the state above Oregon, not by what I meant, but how I say it. I would want to know if you know what is other country WITHOUT going to a map, that has a city called Montpellier, like the one in USA?

...sorry, I guess my post sounded patronizing. Not the intent, it's just whenever I hear someone's moving to Washington, the question of which Washington always comes up because there are two.

As for Montpellier... hmm...
I want to say France, because it has a French feel to it (the ie combination just screams France), but I woudn't be suprised if it's Dutch, since the Netherlands did colonize that region of the US.

Well you're right, france, nice deducing I've to say

Thank you. Do you have another one?
Maybe we could start a game in the Temple?

This thread is about political and economical systems, please stay on topic...

...and try to prove me wrong, if you can. But I doubt you will manage it, since I havent ever met someone who achieved that.

Tell me, why should I like capitalism more than socialism?

marusai wrote:This thread is about political and economical systems, please stay on topic...

...and try to prove me wrong, if you can. But I doubt you will manage it, since I havent ever met someone who achieved that.

Tell me, why should I like capitalism more than socialism?

Socialism has never been proven effective. How can you truely satisfy yourself if you are stuck on the same level as garbage men and dogwalkers when you are something along the lines of a doctor or engineer. Success is removed from society. The drive to be more then your neighbors fails. Competition which pushes the limits of civilization mentally and technologically collapse and you end up being reduces to a fuedal and unhappy state. Also who will rulle this glorious world once everyone is equal? Some mad man with the guns and power to gain control will prey on the fools who seek to be the same as everyone else. It cannot survive and will not survive.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticisms ... al_advance

Look at the U.S. and Japan. Look at Abu Dahbi(sp?) Competition is pushing the limits of the humanly possible. What of granduer and marvel will be left when we all bow to some unnatrual attempt to follow the same path. its not human and it never will be. Why will it fail. because people like me will refuse to follow it. How will the socialist deal with that? Jail me for attaining superiority and freedom? Well then shouldn't everyone go to jail? Yo make it equal that is. The object of power is power. A socialist revolution would lead to socialist dictatorship in which the party leaders control the serfs and reap the rewards of their "euqality" Just like Stalin, just like the USSR, Just like North Korea. Communism can never exist because people will always oppose it.

Tollan Phoenix wrote: I'd probably choose socialist. Then, I could do the minimum work and still have the same benefits as everyone else. And in saying that, I just pointed out a flaw in the system, I believe.

I'd probably choose capitalist since then i'd have firetrucks going around my burning house and none of them would stop to put it out since it belonged to a different company than to the one i subscribed to. Then when i'd get robbed the security guy going going past would let the robber run away because I wasn't registered at the security company that guy belonged to.
Oh yeahm and i wouldn't be able to get medical treatment for my daughter/son because the only company available to offer it (even though it's a very common procedure) would demand my full years pay and if an accident happened at my factory which would make me unfit for work and was caused by neglecting security issues by the company owner, i'd simply get fired and have no money as compensation from which to survive (since there would be no laws forcing anyone to do anything like this)

and when i was living in a socialist system:
you might do minimum work...
I'd do my maximum and i'd be enjoying the free holiday trips or extra payment i'd get since i surpassed the average quota by a set amount.
And i would know that i don't have to worry about parasites nagging at society because those that did not work at all, refused to work and did not do accept any job after not being able to find one they liked, did not get anything. So only hte people that would be putting money into the system would be getting money out of it too.

I'd probably choose capitalist since then i'd have firetrucks going around my burning house and none of them would stop to put it out since it belonged to a different company than to the one i subscribed to.

We have that issue today: I remember distinctly that the Firetrucks belonging to one county, could not respond to a fire in another county. The house burned down by the time the firetrucks got clearance.
That was not because of capitalism. That was because of bureaucracy... a necessary product of socialism.

This does not mean that I don't believe all public services should be halted and replaced with private organizations. However, there is quite a bit of bloat that could be filled by the private sphere. Indeed everything 'could' be replaced by private service... but I don't want to have to sort through five or six hundred bills.

My problem with diluted socialism is not the concept: Unlike Communism, whose concept I see failing, diluted socialism strikes me as a good.
It is merely an institutionalized form of what groups of men already do.
In practicality however, I find that unlike those groups of men (City councils, churches, volunteer groups), the institutionalized practices lead to a lack of service, bureaucracy, and ultimately prove an unnecessary drain upon the people.

With things such as roads, police, fire departments, etc. That can be overlooked. What cannot be overlooked is the difference between the build/fund time of a State schoolroom, and a fully tooled out Lowes home improvement center.

The key is to limit socialism so that the benefit to things such as cultural homogeneity are intact, but needless bureaucracy --the police being unable to tranq the dog pack that’s been killing the neighborhood pets, and homeowners being unallowed to do the same, while the city is unable to hire a certified dogcatcher – is kept down.

Øsiris wrote:

marusai wrote:This thread is about political and economical systems, please stay on topic...

...and try to prove me wrong, if you can. But I doubt you will manage it, since I havent ever met someone who achieved that.

Tell me, why should I like capitalism more than socialism?

Socialism has never been proven effective. How can you truely satisfy yourself if you are stuck on the same level as garbage men and dogwalkers when you are something along the lines of a doctor or engineer. Success is removed from society. The drive to be more then your neighbors fails. Competition which pushes the limits of civilization mentally and technologically collapse and you end up being reduces to a fuedal and unhappy state. Also who will rulle this glorious world once everyone is equal? Some mad man with the guns and power to gain control will prey on the fools who seek to be the same as everyone else. It cannot survive and will not survive.

Well I think it is effective, because it is the only system I know that prevents people from staying illiterate and ensures health care for everyone. You should be gratefull that USA has some socialist elements in its society, otherwise you would have much more than "just" 10% of the population living below poverty. If USA was more socialist, it's society would be in a much better shape than what is it now.

But don't worry, I think that USA will become more civilised and catch up the EU in the next 50 or 100 years. USA has made good progress in the last 100 years.

Øsiris wrote:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticisms ... al_advance

Look at the U.S. and Japan. Look at Abu Dahbi(sp?) Competition is pushing the limits of the humanly possible.

...and that's the reason I never want to go and live in USA nor Japan. The culture might be nice, but the system makes a slave out of you.

Working up to 70 hours a day, only 1 or 2 weeks of holidays. Not with me. I prefer my 40 hour week and 35 days of paid vacation.

@ The Xeno
You got so many things wrong in your post that it makes no sense trying to correct all the mistakes. btw Bureaucracy exists everywhere, it hasn't been "invented" by socialists.

Americans don't work 70 hours a week. We work 40 a week and get paied every 2 weeks I make 10 dollars an hour work as little as I want and still make about a thousand doallars every 3 weeks. I am extremely satisfied with my evil capatalist society.

you make like your free Health Care, but the docters that do it probably aren't happy they are performing surgeries, spent years getting educated and earning nothing more than a laborer. Capitalism gives everybody the chance to move up. Some people are just too lazy (because they gget welfare, or don't need to work). The majority of homeless people in the US are homeless because a lot of them don't want to work. The ones that do WILL find a job. They just need to look hard. Look at the Mexican immigrants, they come over here to work, so theyn they are now making money forr their families. I don't see Europes neighbors having lots of immigrants coming to work. You just need to want to work. Hard work and effort will pay off

Privaten wrote:you make like your free Health Care, but the docters that do it probably aren't happy they are performing surgeries, spent years getting educated and earning nothing more than a laborer. Capitalism gives everybody the chance to move up. Some people are just too lazy (because they gget welfare, or don't need to work). The majority of homeless people in the US are homeless because a lot of them don't want to work. The ones that do WILL find a job. They just need to look hard. Look at the Mexican immigrants, they come over here to work, so theyn they are now making money forr their families. I don't see Europes neighbors having lots of immigrants coming to work. You just need to want to work. Hard work and effort will pay off

I agree with the advancement. However, the generalization that all homeless people are lazy is false. Ever seen the 'Pursuit of Happiness'? Sure, not everyone is Chris Gardner, but sometimes jobs just aren't there for people to get.

I said "a lot", not all. that would be arrogant and ignorant

Privaten wrote:I said "a lot", not all. that would be arrogant and ignorant

Well, then we are at an agreement