Our President's Precedent

[atinymonkey]

newbie said in post # :

The library function seems to be not working so I will check again at a later time.

 

Sums you up, really. I do assume you think your being witty, eloquent and perceptive, obviously not childish and inane.

 

Again, this is not a school. I'm not here to help you understand anything. Your not producing counterpoise to anything, your simply attempting to antagonise as you repeatedly do. What are you looking for here, are you looking for an argument, or an agreement?

 

What problem, exactly, do you have with what I said? Human rights and Fair trade aren’t linked? Humans and trade? Not linked? Of course they are linked, inextricably.

 

Joseph Stiglitz's bestselling book, 'Globalization and Its Discontents', not enough for you to figure out the logic I'm pointing out? To subtle for you? Obviously, your replying without researching what you don't know or understand.

 

And please, don't respond with linkage. Just do some grade school reading.

[newbie]

I do not think this is a school at all, I do not want you to help me understand anything, but it would be nice for you too just once, back up your statements. You acknowledged a book 'Globalization and Its Discontents' as a source, which is a good thing--thank you. I will check it out when I can.

 

What you stated in post 32 you do not have any proof. I have never heard nor read anything like that at all, and I thought at least going to the web would give you the benefit of the doubt, but in the end I came up with nothing. So I was hoping if what you say is true you could possibly show some shred of evidence too your claims, but if you continue to do nothing but change the subject then frankly this is yet another one of your many opinions.

 

Btw, you object to someone searching websites for info? Is that looked down upon to you?

[JaKiri]

At the current rate, I do not feel that attacking either Afghanistan or Iraq was a good move, for the people there or for national security. Or for drugs control, for that matter.

[atinymonkey]

newbie said in post # :

I do not think this is a school at all............... I have never heard nor read anything like that at all.

 

This is the important point. Just because it's not in your head does not make it untrue. Hence the statement about this not being school. I'll discuss things if you have a base knowlage, if you don't happen to know basic economics I can't start to explain the interactions of a budget deficit.

 

What you stated in post 32 you do not have any proof.

 

See above point, the proof is widely available. Google it, but you'll need to understand basic economics.

 

So I was hoping if what you say is true you could possibly show some shred of evidence too your claims, but if you continue to do nothing but change the subject then frankly this is yet another one of your many opinions.

 

Again, reference the above points. This all goes back to a lack of understanding of economics.

 

Btw, you object to someone searching websites for info? Is that looked down upon to you?

 

I do object to someone searching websites. That 'someone' is you. The habit of linking to a website and claiming it as evidence is a common occurance in your posts. However the website usually does not back your argument up, rather it discredits your view. You never seem to read the full page, just the sentance you agree with. Sort back into your posts and you'll see what I mean.

 

Happy? Understand why you can't win the argument? You see it's not an argument, it's a statement of the sociological economic climate in the capitalist society. The pressures of the free markert are unavoidable, as America holds the largest share they also cause the most severe harm. Where a profit can be made, it is. A profit cannot be made unless someone loses out, that's a basic tennet of capitalism. It's not a warm and friendly philosophy.

[newbie]

I am familar with economics, underdeveloped economies are not a result of rich nations, poor nations desperately need aid from the rich nations in the form of capital and of technological and organizational expertise. They also need easy access to the markets of the industrialized nations for their manufactures and raw materials. The political capacity of rich nations to respond to these needs depends greatly on their own success in coping with inflation, unemployment, and lagging growth rates. In democratic communities, it is exceedingly difficult to generate public support for assistance to foreign countries when average wage earners are themselves under serious financial pressure. It is no easier politically to permit cheap foreign merchandise and materials to freely enter American and European markets when they are viewed as the cause of unemployment among domestic workers.

 

for you to say:

1) Do you care to comment on the hundreds of countries living subsistence lifestyles to support the massive consumption of America?

 

2)Who do you think really suffers from your 40 trillion dollar deficits?

 

3)We can go into cash crops, broken fair trade agreements, sweat shops, political slavery et al that put millions of people across the world in abject poverty/starvation to support the American dream?

 

4)Do you think America has the majority of the world’s wealth just because you deserve it?

 

5)You know what, sod it. Think whatever you like, pick whatever evidence makes you happy. Countrys hate America because they are crazy. All of them. Out of their trees. Fruit loops, down to a man. You should bomb them all, the damn filthily gooks, and take what you like. You deserve it.

 

... holds no weight, you have no argument. You might want to blame this on America but clearly no-one else but you believes it to be true. The bold part above sums you up well. As for I "linking to a website and claiming it as evidence" is not something I do often.

 

To get this back on track here, I gave you your "counterpoise" please re-read post 41.

[atinymonkey]

newbie said in post # :

The political capacity of rich nations to respond to these needs depends greatly on their own success in coping with inflation, unemployment, and lagging growth rates. In democratic communities, it is exceedingly difficult to generate public support for assistance to foreign countries when average wage earners are themselves under serious financial pressure.

 

The fact you got your definition of economics from here just backs up my statements about a lack of knowlage:-

 

http://encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_761562677_2/Economics.html

 

Please just read what you copied, it's saying the same thing as I am. Pay particular notice to the words 'lagging growth rates'. My reference was to the 40 trillion dollar defict in America.

 

While your at that, look up the word counterpoise.

 

You see what I mean about school? I'm making you read up on economics, marking your reply, admonishing the plagiarism and setting you homework.

 

Face it Newbie, your not picking an argument with what I said your picking an argument with me. That's trolling.

[newbie]

You are the one trolling, I am not picking an argument with you either. You consistently change face everytime I reply. Why don't you explain your reasoning or at least show how you come to your assumptions. For the 2nd time please re-read post 41. Your are not making a point only your opinions, if you don't have facts then don't gripe to me about it. You are the one who always resorts too negative remarks, ever hear if you don't have something nice to say, don't say anything at all? I'm sure you have, you don't state an unbiased opinion it's always negative. So until you counter what was said in post 41 there is nothing else to say.

[atinymonkey]

Ok. To better explain my point and help you to understand, I will commence a series of lectures designed to give you the grounding in economics you require.

 

I hope you will view this series of courses as a positive step to explaining the global economics that you are currently oblivious to.

[atinymonkey]

Atinymonkey works as a Business Analyst in a Pan Global corporation, his last project was worth £26 million, the project was based around commercial contracting in a economic substructure.

Atinymonkey is now commencing lessons in economics. These lessons, normally contracted out to global companies such as Centrica and Transco, are being staged for the benefit of Newbie, so that after the course he may better understand the complex socio economic climate in which he resides. The course is free, however contracting rates will apply for any consultancy requested.

 

Lesson 1

 

The Pie Room: -

 

There is a room, and in this room reside 240 people. The people live on pies and the pies cost a penny each. There are 4000 pennies in the room. Each person can produce pies at a different rate depending on there size. The biggest person in the room is Joe, Joe has 2/3 of all the pennies (2666 pennies).

 

Now Joe likes pies, Joe is the biggest person in the room. Joe can make a lot of pies, but needs more than he can make. This is known as a ‘Pie Trade Deficit’. He needs to trade to get more pies. Luckily some countries have more pie than they need, but no pennies. Joe can buy pie from these countries. He can only buy as much pie as is available, and has to buy the pie at the price (a penny) that the country want to sell at.

 

Joe is uncomfortable with that situation, as he does not want to have the pennies taken away from him for a unfair price. He must do something to stop that price from rising. He’s not the only person buying pies, but he buys the most. He decides he need to secure pie trade prices. The only way he can do that is if he has control over the pie produces. The answer is simple, make the countries with no pennies dependent on Joe by giving them pennies as a loan. This way, if they raise the prices, Joe can demand his loan back. Joe knows the loan cannot be repaid as he has most of the money, the countries with no pennies are stuck giving Joe his pies at a fixed rate they cannot alter, so they cannot make much profit. Without much profit they cannot afford to pay Joes loan back and are stuck in a loop. This loop is know as the ‘Circle of Pie Poverty’.

 

There is a problem though. Joe is 40 trillion pennies in debt. He doesn’t really want to eat less pies (Joe is very fat, and getting fatter) but he can get the dependent pie trade (the ones in the ‘Circle of Pie Poverty’) to reduce their prices. These countries can no longer afford to produce enough pies to feed themselves as well as pass pies to Joe. They are forced to borrow more money, or starve. They choose to do both, borrow a bit and eat only what they need to stay alive.

 

 

For course credit, construct a similar model in which both pies and Peach Juice are sold. Add in the ability for people to purchase parts of each other, such as arms (pie/juice production) and legs (transportation).

[atinymonkey]

Lesson 2

 

The Red Room: -

 

In the room next to the one in which Joe resides (See Lesson 1 for details) lies the Red room. The red room has red walls, red carpet, red lights and everyone has red clothes on. It makes it a bit tricky to distinguish who is who, as the habitus makes everyone look similar. This isn’t a problem for the occupants, who hit upon the solution of sharing all they had. As it was all red (even the pies!) and there was a finite amount of pennies, they decided the best option was to keep producing pies and placing them in the middle of the room for all to share. Aside from a few greedy individuals who took more than there fair share, this system worked. They called this a communal pie system or commupie for short.

 

Joe saw this approach, and it scared the stuffing out of him. He had a lot of pennies, and needed lots and lots of pies. If that system came across to Joe’s room, Joe would surely wither away from lack of pie. A lot of other people in Joes room agreed that the commupie system left everyone a little hungrier than they would be comfortable with. They decided the best way to combat this philosophy of sharing was to tell everyone who listened that the communal pie system involved eating poo, and getting wedgies.

 

Joe needed not have worried so much, as the greedy pie eaters in the red room would spoil the whole plan. The hungrier of the red room occupants sneaked into Joe’s room, to join in the trading scheme, and Joe laughed at the remaining occupants of the Red room. Well, he laughed quietly as one was very much bigger than Joe and scared him quite a bit.

 

Because Joe was still scared of the remaining occupants of the Red room, especially the big one, he continued to tell everyone they ate poo. But quietly, so as to not anger the one he was scared of. The person in the red room really looked like he could squish Joe flat, like a pie.

 

For extra credit, imagine what would happen to Joe's debts if he was forced to spend half of his pennies on defences to protect him from an attack from the red room. Explain the impact on the poor countrys in the circle of pie poverty.

[newbie]

LOL, I actually had tears in my eyes reading that. That was good. But like I said before, I am aware of basic economics. What you state is true; bigger fish tend to eat up the little ones, but what I do not agree with and where you have a flaw in your argument is in post 32. You blame everything on America, are your trying to say America is to blame for all the worlds problems?

 

You are correct I did get that from the encyclopedia, last time I check that wasn't plagiarism. The point I was showing is in the beginning "underdeveloped economies are not a result of rich nations". There is a lot more credibility from the encyclopedia then you certainly have.

 

When you make a statement and someone doesn’t agree with and gives a reason (post 41) then you should be able to back up your reasoning. But instead as always you ignore it and start up your little person attacks. Here is another phrase I’m sure you are aware of “garbage in, garbage out” I gave you what you gave me. (Post 32, 41) That was your counterpoise.

[JaKiri]

newbie said in post # :

LOL, I actually had tears in my eyes reading that. That was good. But like I said before, I am aware of basic economics. What you state is true; bigger fish tend to eat up the little ones, but what I do not agree with and where you have a flaw in your argument is in post 32. You blame everything on America, are your trying to say America is to blame for all the worlds problems?

 

You are correct I did get that from the encyclopedia, last time I check that wasn't plagiarism. The point I was showing is in the beginning "underdeveloped economies are not a result of rich nations". There is a lot more credibility from the encyclopedia then you certainly have.

 

When you make a statement and someone doesn’t agree with and gives a reason (post 41) then you should be able to back up your reasoning. But instead as always you ignore it and start up your little person attacks. Here is another phrase I’m sure you are aware of “garbage in, garbage out” I gave you what you gave me. (Post 32, 41) That was your counterpoise.

 

Idiot.

[jadote]

newbie said in post #61 :

 

You are correct I did get that from the encyclopedia, last time I check that wasn't plagiarism.

 

Newbie, you copied an entire paragraph (122 words) from that encarta encyclopedia, and all you did was add a 'however'. You neglected to add quotations around the excerpt, and passed it off as your own words. That is plagiarism.

[atinymonkey]

newbie said in post # :

You blame everything on America, are your trying to say America is to blame for all the worlds problems?

I didn't, I was pointing out that America's foreign policy and trade agreements were less than noble and sacrosanct. I wasn't comparing Americas policy unfavourably to anything in particular other than the American governments moral standard it sets for others.

"underdeveloped economies are not a result of rich nations"

Ok, in simple terms then. Easier than the 2 lessons:-

 

In order for you to be richer, someone has to be poorer.

 

If 10 pennies make you richer, someone else is going to have 10 pennies fewer.

 

It's not the capitalist philosophy to allow your cheap production facilities to suddenly become self sufficient and independent from you. Hence the pie story, lesson 1. The countrys are on borderline poverty, and don't have any budget for development. When they do, it's foreign owned.

There is a lot more credibility from the encyclopedia then you certainly have.

Probably, but as it agrees with me it's not much of an issue.

When you make a statement and someone doesn’t agree with and gives a reason (post 41) then you should be able to back up your reasoning. But instead as always you ignore it and start up your little person attacks.

How much more explanation do you need? I'm giving free economics lessons here, I really do get contracted out for this you know!

Here is another phrase I’m sure you are aware of “garbage in, garbage out” I gave you what you gave me. (Post 32, 41) That was your counterpoise.

Your not jadote, your newbie. I was talking to jadote, to whom I apologized. I 'gave' you nothing, but I can apologise if you'd like. Sorry.

 

I'm aware of 'ask a stupid question, get a stupid answer'. You still haven't looked up the word counterpoise yet have you?

[atinymonkey]

Jadote I have to apologise again, this time for the thread highjack and my 2nd post, without which your thread would have continued along an uninterrupted fashion.

 

Do please carry on. Your post seems to be a neat bit of foresight, based on Mr Bush’s recent instigation of an inquiry into pre-war intelligence.

[jadote]

No complaints here, and no need to apologize. It seems that everyone has said what they thought about the original topic.

[newbie]

atm, come on. Everything you said in post 32 points towards the states, you didn't bring in any other country. If you want people to believe you are not biased then maybe you should broaden your assumptions.

 

Ok, in simple terms then. Easier than the 2 lessons:-

 

In order for you to be richer, someone has to be poorer.

 

If 10 pennies make you richer, someone else is going to have 10 pennies fewer.

 

It's not the capitalist philosophy to allow your cheap production facilities to suddenly become self sufficient and independent from you. Hence the pie story, lesson 1. The countrys are on borderline poverty, and don't have any budget for development. When they do, it's foreign owned.

 

I agree 100% but like I said how you presented your ideas in post 32 was wrong.

 

FYI, the encyclopedia doesn't agree with you.

 

Your not jadote, your newbie. I was talking to jadote, to whom I apologized. I 'gave' you nothing, but I can apologise if you'd like. Sorry.

 

I'm aware of 'ask a stupid question, get a stupid answer'. You still haven't looked up the word counterpoise yet have you?

I am certainly not jadote, you don't have to post to me this is a public forum after all. I disagreed with your post so I replied, but if it makes you feel better you are correct, I should have rephrased my post but I was lazy.

 

There is no need to look up the word 'counterpoise', what you posted was balanced by mine.

[atinymonkey]

Whatever point your trying to make, stop. Just stop. I don't understand your issue, we don't understand your problem, you don't understand your point.

 

I tried to help, I wanted to help, I gave my help.

 

Fac ut vivas.

[newbie]

atinymonkey said in post # :

Whatever point your trying to make, stop. Just stop. I don't understand your issue, we don't understand your problem, you don't understand your point.

 

I tried to help, I wanted to help, I gave my help.

 

Fac ut vivas.

 

There was no point; I only posted back garbage that you first posted, that is all. You started this whole charade not me. My issue I stated clear in my last post.

[atinymonkey]

So, we all agreed what I posed was not garbage. We all see the laws of economics are immutable, you agree you had/have no point. I present no charade, no pretense and no hidden agenda.

 

That makes you a troll. Fol de rol rol roll.

[newbie]

atinymonkey said in post # :

So, we all agreed what I posed was not garbage. We all see the laws of economics are immutable, you agree you had/have no point. I present no charade, no pretense and no hidden agenda.

 

That makes you a troll. Fol de rol rol roll.

 

It was you who made no point and proved nothing, you blamed everything on the States. You gave one sentence assumptions and I gave one sentence responses, that is my point. You contributed nothing. You are the troll who always spues hateful remarks on anything that you type.

[Sayonara]

Troll:

 

To make inflamatory comments that are intended to ellicit a vehement response.

 

newbie said in post # :

You are the troll who always spues hateful remarks on anything that you type.

^ That's hardly going to cool things down, now is it?

 

You've added no value to this thread whatsoever, so you're not really in a position to criticise someone for having an opinion.

 

If you like arguing so much, why not go and accept a challenge in the debating forum? At least that's productive.

[atinymonkey]

newbie said in post # :

You are the troll who always spues hateful remarks on anything that you type.

 

I made you laugh until you cried, on purpose. That took some effort to structure posts in a way to illicit such a response. Bearing in mind, nobody partially agrees with you I'd suggest you try to construct a similar post, if you want to appear in any way reasonable.

 

Make me laugh. Go on. Make with the funny funny.

 

People will like you and it'll make you popular.