23 coaches online • Server time: 07:45
* * * Did you know? There are 415945 active teams in FUMBBL.
Recent Forum Topics  Gnome Roster - how a... | Problem to organize ... | Updated star player ... |
2011-08-13 13:32:39
42 votes, rating 3.5
42 votes, rating 3.5
Riots.
I have been out of work for 9 months and have had only 1 reply to a job application form or cv in all that time. my benefits (JSA) barely covers the interest on the debts I accrued attending university working hard for an education that doesn't seem to be worth the price of the paper the certificates are printed on.
As such I want to see revolution, I want to see the end of a morally bankrupt government of haves screwing a financially bankrupt country of have nots. Nobody voted in this government. Nobody voted for them to make the deepest non-war cuts to essential services for a generation. The countries that tried to economise their way out of recession are looking to slide back in. Whereas the countries that tried to buy their way out of recession have mostly succeeded.
How can it be right that an entire class of people seemingly born into positions of power, where its who you know not what you know, should accuse the vast number of unemployed to do more to find work that just isn't there.
60+ applicants per graduate vacancy.
The hypocrisy sickens me.
I in no way condone the violence against people during the riots but I completely understand violence against this "big society", I would happily end it if I could.
In my opinion if the rioting has hastened the departure of this travesty of a government by just 1 day it was worth it.
That includes the bloodshed.
Democracy is government by the people for the people and the rioting shows there is a swathe of the population that desperately want change.
An entire generation is being stripped of dignity through the fault of a generation of plenty (babyboomers) who were never satisfied, never grateful, who believe that greed is good.
One more thing for anyone that thinks the majority of those on JSA are scroungers, workshy, lazy layabouts think again. spend a morning at a jobcentre and see the quality of man that walks through the doors. for every obvious scummy benefit cheat (and they are there) there are at least 9 like me, well turned out, well educated, looking for an opportunity to hold their heads a little higher.
So those with the jobs and moral outrage think again because man will only be trodden on so much. I have food in my belly and still have hope that my job is just round the corner.
But If I was hungry or lost all hope I would have been trying to burn this stinking country down while stealing what I could. And I believe with no food or no hope you would have aswell.
As such I want to see revolution, I want to see the end of a morally bankrupt government of haves screwing a financially bankrupt country of have nots. Nobody voted in this government. Nobody voted for them to make the deepest non-war cuts to essential services for a generation. The countries that tried to economise their way out of recession are looking to slide back in. Whereas the countries that tried to buy their way out of recession have mostly succeeded.
How can it be right that an entire class of people seemingly born into positions of power, where its who you know not what you know, should accuse the vast number of unemployed to do more to find work that just isn't there.
60+ applicants per graduate vacancy.
The hypocrisy sickens me.
I in no way condone the violence against people during the riots but I completely understand violence against this "big society", I would happily end it if I could.
In my opinion if the rioting has hastened the departure of this travesty of a government by just 1 day it was worth it.
That includes the bloodshed.
Democracy is government by the people for the people and the rioting shows there is a swathe of the population that desperately want change.
An entire generation is being stripped of dignity through the fault of a generation of plenty (babyboomers) who were never satisfied, never grateful, who believe that greed is good.
One more thing for anyone that thinks the majority of those on JSA are scroungers, workshy, lazy layabouts think again. spend a morning at a jobcentre and see the quality of man that walks through the doors. for every obvious scummy benefit cheat (and they are there) there are at least 9 like me, well turned out, well educated, looking for an opportunity to hold their heads a little higher.
So those with the jobs and moral outrage think again because man will only be trodden on so much. I have food in my belly and still have hope that my job is just round the corner.
But If I was hungry or lost all hope I would have been trying to burn this stinking country down while stealing what I could. And I believe with no food or no hope you would have aswell.
Comments
Posted by pythrr on 2011-08-13 13:36:48
Ken,
Times are tough. I wish you all the best, and hope that a job surfaces soon.
Cheers
Pyth.
Times are tough. I wish you all the best, and hope that a job surfaces soon.
Cheers
Pyth.
Posted by blader4411 on 2011-08-13 13:37:31
Be glad you're in the 1/3 of the world where there's something called Unemployment Benefits.
Any of us here, with internet access and security could easily have been born into a hell-hole.
-Blader
Any of us here, with internet access and security could easily have been born into a hell-hole.
-Blader
Posted by Arktoris on 2011-08-13 13:40:36
sorry to hear about your situation and I certainly agree with your opinions on baby boomers.
have you thought about starting your own business? If you can't find a job, how about making one?
have you thought about starting your own business? If you can't find a job, how about making one?
Posted by Stinkytroll on 2011-08-13 13:45:36
I know its difficult, but keep your head up mate! I was out of work for 6 months and thought I would lose my mind. Now I have a job with decent benefits that I completely hate! :D
Posted by koadah on 2011-08-13 14:07:25
Best of luck with the job hunt everyone who is looking.
But did you notice how many of the looters actually have jobs. On the bright side there'll be a few more vacancies when they get fired. On the downside those will probably swallowed up by those laid off because their work place no longer exists after being burned down.
The last time we advertised for a graduate job we had 200 applications for 2 posts. That was years ago when there were fewer graduates.
It took me over a year to get my first graduate job.
The world goes in cycles. We followed boom & bust with an even bigger boom & bigger bust.
Cuts are necessary. The only question is how deep and how fast.
I voted for the other lot but they still would have had to cut.
But did you notice how many of the looters actually have jobs. On the bright side there'll be a few more vacancies when they get fired. On the downside those will probably swallowed up by those laid off because their work place no longer exists after being burned down.
The last time we advertised for a graduate job we had 200 applications for 2 posts. That was years ago when there were fewer graduates.
It took me over a year to get my first graduate job.
The world goes in cycles. We followed boom & bust with an even bigger boom & bigger bust.
Cuts are necessary. The only question is how deep and how fast.
I voted for the other lot but they still would have had to cut.
Posted by Miyuso on 2011-08-13 14:09:36
Out of interest, what degree (field) did you graduate with?
Posted by DonTomaso on 2011-08-13 14:52:27
What koadah said...
Cutbacks are bad, but they are necessary. It has nothing to do with politicians 'stuffing their own pockets' (although some certainly do, but they could have done that easier without the cutbacks).
Simple economy really, and when economy is bad, there is less need for anything but economy and perhaps lawyers.
Good luck.
Cutbacks are bad, but they are necessary. It has nothing to do with politicians 'stuffing their own pockets' (although some certainly do, but they could have done that easier without the cutbacks).
Simple economy really, and when economy is bad, there is less need for anything but economy and perhaps lawyers.
Good luck.
Posted by vaclav on 2011-08-13 15:01:50
I am living in a country which is crying for revolts. But after decades of demonstrations, riots and unfulfilled hopes no one wants to go out to streets anymore. No one believes anymore...They are telling us that we are going into another crisis..LOL. I don't almost remember time when we were not in cries, and i am in my thirties. The scum that we overthrow on the streets in the nineties, are on the power again, in the coalition with the politicians who were at the other side of barricades in the nineties. Now we have 30% unemployment, around 300 euros average wages(if you are lucky), and whole nation on antidepresivos.
It is ridicules. Why have we bother at all...
Before all that it was nice socialism with high employment, good health care, good FREE education, much more people had their own flats. All in all it was way much better for 95% of the people.
It is ridicules. Why have we bother at all...
Before all that it was nice socialism with high employment, good health care, good FREE education, much more people had their own flats. All in all it was way much better for 95% of the people.
Posted by DonTomaso on 2011-08-13 15:20:46
Vaclav: not to be all political here, but there is a reason Yugoslavia fell apart. It was, amongst other things, socialismed to death - there were no more money to run it.
(And all the ethnic conflicts doesn't help...)
(And all the ethnic conflicts doesn't help...)
Posted by X_Sniper on 2011-08-13 15:25:59
good luck finding a job man, but the riots are stupid, half the people there are probably have no idea what the riots are about, and a human life can NEVER have a value put on it. I don't know about the govenment (I don't even keep up with my own countries polotics, just confused by them), but if it needs changing, riots are not necasary. molotoves and overurned cars will only get you a face full of tear gas and riot shield, and makes your county look bad.
Once agian, good luck with the job hunting, and I hope whatever change that needs to come will, quickly.
Once agian, good luck with the job hunting, and I hope whatever change that needs to come will, quickly.
Posted by Calcium on 2011-08-13 16:39:18
I wish you luck in finding a job, but rioting and commiting crime punishes everyone, not only the government that you have such a problem with. Yes, this country has real issues right now, but turning to violence/crime cannot be the answer ever. Anyone with half a brain knows that this achieves nothing.
Posted by Electric_Wizard on 2011-08-13 16:48:34
I don't know, but from over here it seems that there is no political motivation in it anymore at all.
"You" riot shops from people who might just worked as hard as you would to get a job there.
I saw little food shops torn to shreds.
Those guys aren't the big bad evil, are they?
If you guys want political change why don't you burn political buildings down? Why don't you riot there? Smash the senate.
"You" riot shops from people who might just worked as hard as you would to get a job there.
I saw little food shops torn to shreds.
Those guys aren't the big bad evil, are they?
If you guys want political change why don't you burn political buildings down? Why don't you riot there? Smash the senate.
Posted by pythrr on 2011-08-13 17:24:38
yeah, or perhaps even, i don't know, vote? (/points at the massive voter apathy/non-turnout in the rioting classes)
Posted by Mr_Foulscumm on 2011-08-13 17:31:02
There is a huge difference between looting and protesting.
Although, seriously, I wouldn't mind a revolution... except foe the fact that the same kind of people will eventually be in charge again.
Save the world, shoot a banker.
Although, seriously, I wouldn't mind a revolution... except foe the fact that the same kind of people will eventually be in charge again.
Save the world, shoot a banker.
Posted by JoeKano on 2011-08-13 18:30:27
Deficit spending is the crime that has been perpetrated here. Societies living beyond their available means. Budgets must be returned to balance. Deficits must be reined in.
These vile thugs who have done this have done nothing but hurt their own communities and those who might have had the sympathy and the will to do anything about it.
I do hope you find your graduate position and wish you well, however hard decisions have to be taken.
The Western Liberal Democracies are failing. The barbarians are watching the frontiers, those that aren't already crossing them .
These vile thugs who have done this have done nothing but hurt their own communities and those who might have had the sympathy and the will to do anything about it.
I do hope you find your graduate position and wish you well, however hard decisions have to be taken.
The Western Liberal Democracies are failing. The barbarians are watching the frontiers, those that aren't already crossing them .
Posted by DragonsMaw on 2011-08-13 18:30:36
@ Calcium: Actually, anyone with half a brain and history book sees that violence is an EXCEPTIONALLY effective tool for change. War of Independence, American-Indian War, Stalin and his little crazies. Please note that I don't in anyway condone violence, or in general agree with the people who tend to use violence to get the change, but it DOES cause change.
@ Fouly: Amen... Huge difference. Preach that revolution brother... But then, you're also right, the same type of people always end up back in power. The question I ask, is it that it's the same people every time, or that the power makes them that way every time? Though that's purely philosophy.
@ Fouly: Amen... Huge difference. Preach that revolution brother... But then, you're also right, the same type of people always end up back in power. The question I ask, is it that it's the same people every time, or that the power makes them that way every time? Though that's purely philosophy.
Posted by Catalyst32 on 2011-08-13 18:43:13
Look at what was going on in your countries economy from 1976 to 1980 and see how it compares to today. (This may not apply to those of you in Communist Nations at the time. IDK.) Odds are you will see that unemployment and a slow economy existed for your country during that period of time too. Why?
The United States Economy equals about 80% of the World Economy... and the people running the United States at that time had the same terrible economic policies as the people running the United States today have. Jimmy Carter = Barrack Obama on Economics.
You Lefties won't believe it. But once Obama is GONE from OFFICE if he is replaced by a Republican the entire economy of the United States will turn around and within 4 years you will see a difference... within 8 years you will be back on track... and withing 12 years BOOM TIMES will be back.
I know what you Lefties will say... blame George Bush... blah, blah, blah. But he was faced with a Network of Terrorists (not just Al Quaeda) whose primary goal in their war was to cripple the US Economy (and thereby the World Economy). The spending Bush did was FORCED on him by Terrorists and the irresponsibility of the Clinton Government who had so deeply cut or military that our troops did not have proper body armor OR armored transports.
Those days are nearly behind us as a planet. Do not let your current desperation lead you to become no better than the animals we fought against side by side with many of your countrymen. The future for Democracy and a Civilized World is STRONG. Hold on to your HUMANITY and hold onto your HOPE... because removing Obama from office is going to bring the CHANGE the world so desperately needs.
The United States Economy equals about 80% of the World Economy... and the people running the United States at that time had the same terrible economic policies as the people running the United States today have. Jimmy Carter = Barrack Obama on Economics.
You Lefties won't believe it. But once Obama is GONE from OFFICE if he is replaced by a Republican the entire economy of the United States will turn around and within 4 years you will see a difference... within 8 years you will be back on track... and withing 12 years BOOM TIMES will be back.
I know what you Lefties will say... blame George Bush... blah, blah, blah. But he was faced with a Network of Terrorists (not just Al Quaeda) whose primary goal in their war was to cripple the US Economy (and thereby the World Economy). The spending Bush did was FORCED on him by Terrorists and the irresponsibility of the Clinton Government who had so deeply cut or military that our troops did not have proper body armor OR armored transports.
Those days are nearly behind us as a planet. Do not let your current desperation lead you to become no better than the animals we fought against side by side with many of your countrymen. The future for Democracy and a Civilized World is STRONG. Hold on to your HUMANITY and hold onto your HOPE... because removing Obama from office is going to bring the CHANGE the world so desperately needs.
Posted by pythrr on 2011-08-13 18:53:20
"But once Obama is GONE from OFFICE if he is replaced by a Republican the entire economy of the United States will turn around"
--
No. Way. In. Hell. Will. It. Be. That. Easy.
--
No. Way. In. Hell. Will. It. Be. That. Easy.
Posted by Mr_Foulscumm on 2011-08-13 18:54:39
Catalyst isn't living on planet earth anymore? :D
Oh and please, please, stop putting in words in all capital letters. It adds nothing but annoying and dumb to your posts.
Oh and please, please, stop putting in words in all capital letters. It adds nothing but annoying and dumb to your posts.
Posted by Catalyst32 on 2011-08-13 20:51:40
pythrr... that is EXACTLY how easy it was the last time the US had a Socialist for a President. And his replacement had to fight an opposition party in BOTH of our Houses of Congress to lead us back out of the malaise. This time that President will have at least 1 House of Congress if not BOTH working with him towards a pro-growth economic platform.
Not only that... but Socialist Europe has finally realized it needs to do away with some of those terrible policies that have dragged your countries down since WWII and to start favoring economic policies that actually WORK. So you guys will be pulling WITH US instead of pulling in whatever crazy direction you want. (Not that all Socialism is bad... some of it is absolutely NECESSARY and good. You won't be scrapping it entirely... just the stupid parts you can no longer afford.)
It will be GREAT to have Europe pulling it's economic weight in the world once again... and all of your lives will improve (unless you intend to be a worthless bum... but that is your right in a free society if you choose that). You may be jobless now... or hate your job... just man up... stiff upper lip and send money to elect a Republican President in America and all will be right with the world once again in short order.
Fouly... NO... Just because you don't like it. It isn't my fault you cannot face ECONOMIC REALITY or CAPITAL LETTERS. Jimmy Carter's Policies FAILED the 1st time and they are FAILING this time too. The good news is that Obama, Pelosi and Reed have so thoroughly DESTROYED the good name of the Democrat Party that you can count on a landslide defeat in every election cycle for the next decade.
Not only that... but Socialist Europe has finally realized it needs to do away with some of those terrible policies that have dragged your countries down since WWII and to start favoring economic policies that actually WORK. So you guys will be pulling WITH US instead of pulling in whatever crazy direction you want. (Not that all Socialism is bad... some of it is absolutely NECESSARY and good. You won't be scrapping it entirely... just the stupid parts you can no longer afford.)
It will be GREAT to have Europe pulling it's economic weight in the world once again... and all of your lives will improve (unless you intend to be a worthless bum... but that is your right in a free society if you choose that). You may be jobless now... or hate your job... just man up... stiff upper lip and send money to elect a Republican President in America and all will be right with the world once again in short order.
Fouly... NO... Just because you don't like it. It isn't my fault you cannot face ECONOMIC REALITY or CAPITAL LETTERS. Jimmy Carter's Policies FAILED the 1st time and they are FAILING this time too. The good news is that Obama, Pelosi and Reed have so thoroughly DESTROYED the good name of the Democrat Party that you can count on a landslide defeat in every election cycle for the next decade.
Posted by Royston on 2011-08-13 20:57:31
Ken, you are exactly the type of person I am happy to help in an indirect way with my taxes. For every benefits scrounger I am sure there are many more who want to work but cannot catch a break.
Although I also pay myself in an indirect way, which I am also happy to do. :)
Although I also pay myself in an indirect way, which I am also happy to do. :)
Posted by Randy_Moss on 2011-08-13 21:03:51
Food is the only prerequisite to peace. The full-bellied and violent are spoiled pigs.
Posted by pythrr on 2011-08-13 21:38:12
catalyst, you are a tea-party loonie.
next
next
Posted by JackassRampant on 2011-08-13 22:51:17
I'm with you, KenThis. I've been unemployed for two years despite regularly looking for work. I'm barely scraping by as a freelancer, strictly on the strength of my mad English skillz. I've found it completely impossible to work for anyone who can afford to hire full-time employees: the attitude of big business (and even medium-sized business) has become insufferable and they don't offer a living wage even to their regular employees. So now I work exclusively for individuals and small companies: their cash-flow problems are annoying, but at least they're human beings.
1) Rioting doesn't solve anything. Protesting and voting do solve things. The feeling that they don't is actually a trick of the principle of intermittent rewards: protesting usually yields incremental progress, almost never gets you all you wanted, and may backfire, while mass voter turnout leads to better representation only in fits and starts. This makes it feel like bad odds, in much the same way that game-winning 2+ roll feels doomed to failure, while the crazy sequence feels like hope.
2) Yeah, we got a lot of bankers and oilmen who need to be shot. I really don't see a nonviolent answer, which leaves me very unhappy, because I'm not one to advocate political violence. But yeah, the banker class has got too big for its bridges, and I don't think there's any room anymore for a modern-day Teddy Roosevelt.
3) Speaking of Teddy Roosevelt, he was the last Republican worth a damn. Sorry, Catalyst32, but when a right-winger like pythrr is calling you a "tea-party loonie" I have to chuckle a little. The Republicans are the ones who created this problem, and they have announced their solution loud and clear: make it worse. Not keen on Obama, but only because he obstinately refuses to go after big business with a hammer.
1) Rioting doesn't solve anything. Protesting and voting do solve things. The feeling that they don't is actually a trick of the principle of intermittent rewards: protesting usually yields incremental progress, almost never gets you all you wanted, and may backfire, while mass voter turnout leads to better representation only in fits and starts. This makes it feel like bad odds, in much the same way that game-winning 2+ roll feels doomed to failure, while the crazy sequence feels like hope.
2) Yeah, we got a lot of bankers and oilmen who need to be shot. I really don't see a nonviolent answer, which leaves me very unhappy, because I'm not one to advocate political violence. But yeah, the banker class has got too big for its bridges, and I don't think there's any room anymore for a modern-day Teddy Roosevelt.
3) Speaking of Teddy Roosevelt, he was the last Republican worth a damn. Sorry, Catalyst32, but when a right-winger like pythrr is calling you a "tea-party loonie" I have to chuckle a little. The Republicans are the ones who created this problem, and they have announced their solution loud and clear: make it worse. Not keen on Obama, but only because he obstinately refuses to go after big business with a hammer.
Posted by JackassRampant on 2011-08-13 22:54:36
Oh, and the U.S. has never had a socialist president. The closest we ever got was FDR, who by the way was the best president we've ever had.
Posted by DragonsMaw on 2011-08-13 23:44:07
Bush picked up issues in the housing market and credit problems from Clinton (admittedly shoddy research). Therefore the economy started to crack early on. He and his cronies then proceeded to hit those cracks with sledgehammers. Obama and company have taken the holes left by the sledgehammers, and brought in wrecking balls. The results? Everyone screwed up. Politicians always seem to. The economy will resolve itself, it always does. But it's probably not going to be done by the US government, and it CERTAINLY won't be just because we vote for the other party. Seriously catalyst, go read some books or something...
Posted by fly on 2011-08-14 01:45:18
The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.
Thomas Jefferson
Replace patriots with politicians and tyrants with bankers. Most of either category would count.
Thomas Jefferson
Replace patriots with politicians and tyrants with bankers. Most of either category would count.
Posted by JackassRampant on 2011-08-14 03:53:49
@Dragonsmaw:
Problem #1: Clinton deregulated the banks. Bush made it worse.
Problem #2: The housing bubble is a consequence of the deregulation of banks, letting the bankers play both ends of any given deal and generate big ol' Ponzi schemes.
Problem #3: Bush cut taxes on the very wealthy, lower than they had any right to go. Clinton had already trimmed their tax rates before, which may have been warranted because at the time the government was running a surplus.
Problem #4: The collapse happened in '08,on Bush/Paulson's watch. Their response was sufficent in scope, but unclear in purpose, and thus only somewhat effective.
Problem #5: Obama didn't do enough in the aftermath. He did a good job with GM, but should have pushed harder on the "2-fer" projects he campaigned on. As a result, stagnation.
FDR got us ready to get out of the Great Depression through massive public works programs. He stalled out those programs in the wake of the '36 elections and a renewed focus on debt, and it wasn't until the (government-sponsored, of course) ramp-up of WWII that we found ourselves in the clear.
@KenThis, and thread in general:
The way I see it, markets are great for making good situations better, and for solving acute individual distresses. They're not very good for solving or avoiding systemic problems, because they operate without any kind of central control. I think a lot of people understand that there's a delicate balancing act, where you need safeguards for and from the market, but you don't want to stifle innovation or competition. Some people seem only to see one side of that balance, and that's where those outmoded concepts of "capitalism" and "socialism" come from.
Problem #1: Clinton deregulated the banks. Bush made it worse.
Problem #2: The housing bubble is a consequence of the deregulation of banks, letting the bankers play both ends of any given deal and generate big ol' Ponzi schemes.
Problem #3: Bush cut taxes on the very wealthy, lower than they had any right to go. Clinton had already trimmed their tax rates before, which may have been warranted because at the time the government was running a surplus.
Problem #4: The collapse happened in '08,on Bush/Paulson's watch. Their response was sufficent in scope, but unclear in purpose, and thus only somewhat effective.
Problem #5: Obama didn't do enough in the aftermath. He did a good job with GM, but should have pushed harder on the "2-fer" projects he campaigned on. As a result, stagnation.
FDR got us ready to get out of the Great Depression through massive public works programs. He stalled out those programs in the wake of the '36 elections and a renewed focus on debt, and it wasn't until the (government-sponsored, of course) ramp-up of WWII that we found ourselves in the clear.
@KenThis, and thread in general:
The way I see it, markets are great for making good situations better, and for solving acute individual distresses. They're not very good for solving or avoiding systemic problems, because they operate without any kind of central control. I think a lot of people understand that there's a delicate balancing act, where you need safeguards for and from the market, but you don't want to stifle innovation or competition. Some people seem only to see one side of that balance, and that's where those outmoded concepts of "capitalism" and "socialism" come from.
Posted by t0tem on 2011-08-14 05:08:59
rioters gonna riot.
Posted by DragonsMaw on 2011-08-14 08:38:17
Rampant... Thank you for saying 'problem, I'm going to repeat what you said back at you, but try to make it sound like you were wrong'.
I said Bush picked up problems from Clinton, that's your #1 and #2. Then made them worse, that's your number #3 and #4. And then Obama made it worse, that's your number #5.
Now, if you really WERE agreeing with me, and were just trying to give me info, I apologize...
I said Bush picked up problems from Clinton, that's your #1 and #2. Then made them worse, that's your number #3 and #4. And then Obama made it worse, that's your number #5.
Now, if you really WERE agreeing with me, and were just trying to give me info, I apologize...
Posted by PigStar-69 on 2011-08-14 09:48:51
get a job u waster ;-D
Posted by Gromrilram on 2011-08-14 14:22:58
Ken, good luck. Unfortunatelly it is really luck you might need, and thats the point that ought to be changed. on the other hand...
catalyst... i really hate pointing things out, but your 80% of world economics... did you make that up? have you heard that "somewhere"? or are you just as stupid as you successfully manage to look like?
worlds combine GDP:
63.000.000 million us dollars. (varing by roughly 100.000 million depending wether you go by CIA, world bank, or monetary fund)
US GDP:
14.600.000 million us dollars (again, varying depending on wich of the 3 sources you want to believe)
just as a rough math thing... 14,6 is not 80% of 63,0...
catalyst... i really hate pointing things out, but your 80% of world economics... did you make that up? have you heard that "somewhere"? or are you just as stupid as you successfully manage to look like?
worlds combine GDP:
63.000.000 million us dollars. (varing by roughly 100.000 million depending wether you go by CIA, world bank, or monetary fund)
US GDP:
14.600.000 million us dollars (again, varying depending on wich of the 3 sources you want to believe)
just as a rough math thing... 14,6 is not 80% of 63,0...
Posted by Gromrilram on 2011-08-14 14:24:17
ohh.... and guys... read up the definition of "socialist". you seem to not know it.
Posted by JackassRampant on 2011-08-14 15:06:39
@ Gromrilram: Yeah, I was going to leave that 80% thing alone. That's brave of you. It was 25% in the '90s, and the rest of the world has started to catch up. Using your numbers, 14.6/63 is about 4 1/3, so yeah, that backs up my understanding.
@ Dragonsmaw: I was clarifying, not disagreeing with the big picture, but rather with the "wrecking balls" comment. Using your analogy, I'd say Obama tried to patch the sledgehammer holes instead of taking out the drywall and replacing it.
@ Dragonsmaw: I was clarifying, not disagreeing with the big picture, but rather with the "wrecking balls" comment. Using your analogy, I'd say Obama tried to patch the sledgehammer holes instead of taking out the drywall and replacing it.
Posted by JackassRampant on 2011-08-14 15:07:59
I wouldn't be surprised if we spent 80% of the world's military budget... probably not, but I betcha it's at least about half.
Posted by pythrr on 2011-08-14 15:55:52
According to
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/spending.htm
It is around 1/3
Hope you get good value for all that cash, err, debt.
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/spending.htm
It is around 1/3
Hope you get good value for all that cash, err, debt.
Posted by pythrr on 2011-08-14 15:56:40
oh, and those were 2007 numbers.
Posted by Gromrilram on 2011-08-14 18:00:51
military spending, again source is CIA factbook:
http://www.globalfirepower.com/defense-spending-budget.asp
http://www.globalfirepower.com/defense-spending-budget.asp
Posted by JackassRampant on 2011-08-14 22:27:22
@pythrr: in the U.S.'s defense, we kind of have to overspend on our military, at least until y'all over there in Europe shoulder a larger fraction of the burden. Who do you call on when the crap hits the fan? A 50% margin (23% GDP, a third of all military spending) isn't that grotesque, in that light.
After all, when was the last time the U.S. lost a pitched battle on the ground? Who would be dumb enough to do anything militarily that radically upset the global balance? We should be collecting royalties from most of the developed world: cross-border wars are almost a thing of the past, and that's largely due to the fact that nobody wants the U.S. on their doorstep. Doesn't mean much with internecine conflict, as we've seen so catastrophically in Ghana, Congo, Somalia, Indonesia, and Sudan. But when's the last time one country invaded another?
After all, when was the last time the U.S. lost a pitched battle on the ground? Who would be dumb enough to do anything militarily that radically upset the global balance? We should be collecting royalties from most of the developed world: cross-border wars are almost a thing of the past, and that's largely due to the fact that nobody wants the U.S. on their doorstep. Doesn't mean much with internecine conflict, as we've seen so catastrophically in Ghana, Congo, Somalia, Indonesia, and Sudan. But when's the last time one country invaded another?
Posted by JackassRampant on 2011-08-14 22:28:13
Not counting the US and its "coalition" figleafs. ("You forgot Poland!")
Posted by Gromrilram on 2011-08-15 02:52:12
again... read definitions. (and that in fact IS important when you throw around terms like "cross-border wars" "internecine conflict" and "invasion") an invasion is an act of foreign soldiers entering a land to perform military actions.
that has happened lately:
north and south korea
USA and pakistan
USA and iraq
NATO and afghanistan
NATO and lybia
saudi arabia and bahrain
russia and georgia
and let me point out... you can define "win" and "loose" in many ways, so im not going there... but afghanistan now drags as long as vietnam.
that has happened lately:
north and south korea
USA and pakistan
USA and iraq
NATO and afghanistan
NATO and lybia
saudi arabia and bahrain
russia and georgia
and let me point out... you can define "win" and "loose" in many ways, so im not going there... but afghanistan now drags as long as vietnam.
Posted by Timlagor on 2011-08-15 04:04:10
You have to overspend on the military because 3 US deaths is unacceptable losses to joe public.
Markets are *terrible* at just about everything -unfortunately there are plenty of ways to do thing even worse.
The idea that *unregulated* markets are in any way a good idea is utter fallacy though.. the thinking seems to be something like:
- perfect competition allocates resources perfectly
- perfect competition is unregulate
- therefore regulation is bad
... completely ignoring all the other things perfect competition requires that have absolutely no hope whatsoever of coming anywhere near being vaguely close to approximately trueish (perfect information and rational operators being the most blatant).
This is even worse for things like labour markets where leverage on/by capital can really mess things up.
Amusing would be the wrong word for my sentiment every time I hear people talk about deficits as though the size of hte actual debt didn't matter. (and should we really sympathise with people rioting over having to retire at 58 instead of 55?)
Markets are *terrible* at just about everything -unfortunately there are plenty of ways to do thing even worse.
The idea that *unregulated* markets are in any way a good idea is utter fallacy though.. the thinking seems to be something like:
- perfect competition allocates resources perfectly
- perfect competition is unregulate
- therefore regulation is bad
... completely ignoring all the other things perfect competition requires that have absolutely no hope whatsoever of coming anywhere near being vaguely close to approximately trueish (perfect information and rational operators being the most blatant).
This is even worse for things like labour markets where leverage on/by capital can really mess things up.
Amusing would be the wrong word for my sentiment every time I hear people talk about deficits as though the size of hte actual debt didn't matter. (and should we really sympathise with people rioting over having to retire at 58 instead of 55?)
Posted by JackassRampant on 2011-08-15 18:20:00
@Gromrilram: North and South Korea last turned hot about, oh, 60 years ago? There's been an uneasy peace (thanks to U.S. intervention) for 57 years. I did put in that qualifier about the USA/USA-led (NATO, CotW, whatever) interventions. That leaves Russia/Georgia and Saudi Arabia/Bahrain. Also note that I was referring to pitched battles: the USA is just as subject to strategic failure as anybody. Can't ever lose a single big fight, though.
@Timlagor: 3 US deaths isn't necessarily unacceptable. You're maybe looking at Iraq and Vietnam when you say this, because all of the second US/Iraq war and the bulk of Vietnam were just dumb mistakes. Americans are much more tolerant of casualties when it's not a stupid pointless exercise in wasting life.
Markets are good at a lot of things. Our level of material culture is to a great extent market-driven. When it comes to leisure and convenience, markets are a great way to handle it. Markets work okay for distribution of goods... so long as the basic framework is in place for a functional system.
But if it absolutely has to work, if failure to get it done right means people suffer, don't trust the market! Even when it works, it becomes a problem. Employer-based health insurance was okay until the insurers got too big for the regulators. Now we're smothered by rising costs that bear no relation to the real cost of treatment or to ability to pay. Mercenary soldiers who win wars end up staging coups. That's just how it goes.
@Timlagor: 3 US deaths isn't necessarily unacceptable. You're maybe looking at Iraq and Vietnam when you say this, because all of the second US/Iraq war and the bulk of Vietnam were just dumb mistakes. Americans are much more tolerant of casualties when it's not a stupid pointless exercise in wasting life.
Markets are good at a lot of things. Our level of material culture is to a great extent market-driven. When it comes to leisure and convenience, markets are a great way to handle it. Markets work okay for distribution of goods... so long as the basic framework is in place for a functional system.
But if it absolutely has to work, if failure to get it done right means people suffer, don't trust the market! Even when it works, it becomes a problem. Employer-based health insurance was okay until the insurers got too big for the regulators. Now we're smothered by rising costs that bear no relation to the real cost of treatment or to ability to pay. Mercenary soldiers who win wars end up staging coups. That's just how it goes.
Posted by Arktoris on 2011-08-16 01:04:07
@catalyst: maybe 30years ago Republicans were better for the economy but that was before the baby boomers took over. Now they are just as incompetent as the liberals. Notice they only care about responsible spending when democrats own the white house. When Repubs have the house/senate/white house...it's a free for all in spending. Unless Ron paul is the republican presidental candidate, the economy and debt problems will be absolutely no better than having obama a second term. Why? Because both parties serve the same master.
bottomline: don't elect a Republican to do a Libertarian's job.
bottomline: don't elect a Republican to do a Libertarian's job.