Go back
Feast or famine

Feast or famine

Debates

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Esoteric
So why don't you go after Mugabe? Or help Sudan?

And i am sure the 20 000 to 600 000 (depending on sources) dead innocent Iraqis and the 3 million Iraqi refugees since the US invasion agree that they are better of without Saddam. Moron.
I not surprised he chose to ignore that post.

we all know the answer and its not a pretty one for right wing racists.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by der schwarze Ritter
I think your points are accurate, however, I would add one more: I don't believe most of it gets to the people it is supposed to help. Usually the strongman and his henchmen steal most, if not all of it.
I think what you say is true. The more a reason to go for microcredits. In that way you by-pass corrupt leaders.
And, it's not charity, it's a loan: people have to pay back the money they borrow (+ interest). I read that 98% succeeds in doing so! It's essential that the poor in the 3rd world can get a loan (to start businesses, etc.).

Allowing people a microcredit is a less frustrating way of GIVING aid: it doesn't feel like we're wasting our money/food aid.
Microcredits will also prove to be far more helpful to the RECIPIENTS.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Yeah, this is my problem with this forum. I participate heavily in other forums and argue in favor of anarchosyndicalism (or "libertarian socialism" if you prefer). But here there are two classes: decent folk, and outright Nazis like "Black Rider" (let's not truss it up in German as if we were edu-ma-kated). I've popped in here over the course of three years (lurking), and "Black Rider" hasn't evolved one single iota despite all that's been said to counter his endless barrage of Nazi crap. Some individuals are essentially automatons who cannot break away from their original programmings and see a Greater Whole of any kind. They remember only to breathe and to hate, and nothing more. As an American I find him an abject embarrassment that I'm convinced history will pass by within a couple of generations. The days of the American Empire are numbered, and I will cheer when it's finally destroyed. I will help destroy it if given the chance.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Soothfast
Yeah, this is my problem with this forum. I participate heavily in other forums and argue in favor of anarchosyndicalism (or "libertarian socialism" if you prefer). But here there are two classes: decent folk, and outright Nazis like "Black Rider" (let's not truss it up in German as if we were edu-ma-kated). I've popped in here over the course of three yea ...[text shortened]... will cheer when it's finally destroyed. I will help destroy it if given the chance.
Stick with anarchosyndicalism and quit sullying the word libertarian.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by der schwarze Ritter
Although I never brought up the greatness of America, I suppose this perception/reality has three components:

How we see ourselves.
How others see us.
How we really are.
Oh, oh, didn't they do a personality test based on the first three
animals you choose as favourites being the 3 items you listed
respectively?

What do you think best apply to the US government?
(not the people of America)

Vote Up
Vote Down

Like I intimated, this forum is lacking a certain something. So, shall we dicker over the precise meaning of "libertarian", or shall we discuss real issues? No, I get a clown from Down Under who wants to have a pissing match about semantics. Junior high locker room tripe that bores me senseless. Ego-driven dominance games are not what I'm interested in. The scorn of anonymous entities thousands of miles away does not impress me. Life's too short for such nonsense.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Soothfast
Like I intimated, this forum is lacking a certain something. So, shall we dicker over the precise meaning of "libertarian", or shall we discuss real issues? No, I get a clown from Down Under who wants to have a pissing match about semantics. Junior high locker room tripe that bores me senseless. Ego-driven dominance games are not what I'm interested in. Th ...[text shortened]... us entities thousands of miles away does not impress me. Life's too short for such nonsense.
Bye...byeeeeee

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Soothfast
They remember only to breathe and to hate, and nothing more. As an American I find him an abject embarrassment that I'm convinced history will pass by within a couple of generations. The days of the American Empire are numbered, and I will cheer when it's finally destroyed. I will help destroy it if given the chance.[/b]
A bit hypocritical don't you think when in the same breath you
ranted hatred about America?

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Thequ1ck
A bit hypocritical don't you think when in the same breath you
ranted hatred about America?
Ah the hypocrisy alright Thequ1ck, in a post dripping with scorn he rails against scorn, but don't waste your breath he's said he's going.

Vote Up
Vote Down

I didn't say I'm going anywhere. And here again we split atoms over semantics. Yeah, I hate the American government, but the American government is not the same as the citizenry of the United States. The lust for hegemony is innate in all nations, and in the case of the U.S. actual power has translated into an actual campaign to acquire supreme global hegemony. In the nuclear age such a state of affairs bodes ill for the continuation of human civilization. That should set off alarm bells in any sane person's head. The rabid nationalism of "Black Rider" is both a cause and effect of this crisis, and whenever an empire becomes too drunk with its own power it is bound to take a great fall -- that much history has taught us, even if we refuse to acknowledge it.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Actually, after reading through this entire thread, I feel that soothfast (while possibly being a tad apocolyptic) is making some good points. Given that there are important issues which should be _debated_ we find we can't because we have a few sticking to their guns so adamantly in the face of real points of discussion.
As for the point of food aid, you'll find that Europe does not give any food aid for the exact reasons shown of damaging local markets...
unfortunate (but I do feel necessary) downside is that we literally have mountains of food left to rot while people starve.
Compare this to the US or indeed any non-EU country?
(Oh, and please, no one mention the US aids relief again, given that it's only given if the country agrees to promote abstinence in the place of cheap and proven effective contraception)

1 edit
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by petrosianpupil
I not surprised he chose to ignore that post.

we all know the answer and its not a pretty one for right wing racists.
I ignore Esoteric as a general rule. He's an annoying spammer. I do my best to avoid paying attention to what he has to say simply because I find his method of posting irritating.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by agryson
Actually, after reading through this entire thread, I feel that soothfast (while possibly being a tad apocolyptic) is making some good points. Given that there are important issues which should be _debated_ we find we can't because we have a few sticking to their guns so adamantly in the face of real points of discussion.
As for the point of food aid, you'l ...[text shortened]... ountry agrees to promote abstinence in the place of cheap and proven effective contraception)
The market would quickly stop producing such food surpluses if it were allowed to be free. Then these useless farmers would have to get real jobs.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Wallie
Giving food to the hungry is a good thing. We must continue to do so.

However, USA(*) food aid (food, not money) has two important side-effects:
(from an excellent Dutch documentary)

1. by giving away a part of agricultural surplus (I hope this is proper English), you avoid USA prices going down (no/smaller surplus has less negative effect on prices th ...[text shortened]... at want to comment on this?


(*) I think this applies to all western countries donating food
1. by giving away a part of agricultural surplus (I hope this is proper English), you avoid USA prices going down (no/smaller surplus has less negative effect on prices than bigger surplus). Ergo: the USA benefits (indirectly) from donating food to other countries.

That doesn't mean the US benefits. It means that those who sell food in the US benefit at the expense of the rest of us.

Vote Up
Vote Down

useless farmers would have to get real jobs?
The farmers we're talking about are living in countries where unemployment is that biggest employer, it's a VERY blinkered and westerncentric view to think they can just go get another job, do you even know what we're talking about?
That was absolujtely a ridiculous statement by you.