Jump to content

 

 

The Real PapaBear

Members
  • Posts

    2,366
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation

0 Neutral
  1. We must never forget. Never forget the utter waste of milions of the most productive of humans lives; never forget the devastation of the lives of those who were left; never forget what happens when an unelected elite plays pawns with the lives of young men; never forget the bombast, the jingoism and the false patriotism of those who stood on the sidelines encouraging others to die for their own machismo and national inferiority complexes. Never forget the manipulation and propaganda which lead millions to end their lives early so that a few could continue to enjoy the high life. When you "remember the Somme"; ask yourselves what it is you are remembering.
  2. 2010/11 Lost v Braga in CL Qualifiers 2010/11 Lost v Utrecht in UEFA Cup Qualifiers 2011/12 Lost v Sion in Europa League Qualifiers. Awarded tie because Sion fielded an ineligible player. 2011/12 Eliminated from Europa League at Group stage after winning one game from six. 2012/13 Qualified from CL group stages. 2013/14 Eliminated from CL at Group stage after winning 1 game and losing 5. 2014/15 Lost to Legia Warsaw.Awarded tie because Legia fielded an ineligible player. 2014/15 Lost to Maribor in CL qualifying stages Tell me again how much Scottish football owes you, Scotty? Apart from the comedy value, I make it one good season in the past 5 years.
  3. I think you'll fnd it is not just 'semantics'; it's logic. Thanksgiving is, by its very nature, inextricably linked with the Pilgrims, since it is a celebration about the Pilgrims. The Pilgrims however are not inextricably linked with Thanksgiving. Had there been no Pilgrims, there would have been no Thanksgiving. Had there been no Thanksgiving, it wouldn't have mattered a jot to story of the Pilgrims How in the name of Jesus H can you have a "democratically-elected" capitalism? Are we to have referenda throughout the countries of the world to choose the heads of BP, Toyota and Amazon? I'm guessing that what you're trying to say is that a free-market economy, regulated within a social-democratic framework for the general good of society, whilst protecting the rights and aspirations of the individual, is the system that works best for everyone.
  4. you said: "To me a market is inextricably linked to Capitalism." if it is inextricable, it cannot be an entity on its own. Clearly it can and, for most of human history, has. This, if I may, is another example of binary thinking. Capitalism=markets=capitalism. It suggests, indeed proves, that unfetterred capitalism is every bit as oppressive to those on the receiving end of it as so-called 'socialist' oppression. American foreign policy has largely, if not entirely, been driven by the interests of their major corporations ever since, and before, Eisenhower warned, in vain, of the military-industrial complex.
  5. And at the risk of being patronising, I'd say that's the problem right there. You tend to think in a very binary fashion. Markets existed for millenia before capital was invented. Capitalism is a relatively recent development in human terms; the barter and exchange of goods and services has been around infinitely longer. As for pure socialism, I'm not sure there ever was or could be such a thing, but in any event it wouldn't be the binary opposite of Capitalism, whereby it was the only alternative and it certainly couldn't be more oppressive than the type of capitalism forced on the countries of Latin and South America by the US and its companies. When people had the chance they voted Socialist and the result was, more often than not, a US backed military coup and dictatorship. Google Salvador Allende.
  6. Capitalism is entirely independent of its environment. It can and does exist quite happily outside a free market - in fact it prefers the market to be rigged, thereby ensuring more profit. You've stretched your definition so much that if it was a rubber baloon it would now look like a bloody giraffe. And here is the nub of your problem. The failure to differentiate between capitalism and the many other forms of economic activity. Feudalism and mercantilism really are not forms of capitalism; you are confusing 'capital' with 'wealth'. Feudal lords would be just as happy with 40 cows as 300 gold soverigns whereas a capitalist would immediately sell the cows to get the soverigns. Ah, so when you said that capitalism learns and evolves you meant that it learns at the rate of a backward child? It doesn't learn not to crash economies, it just learns not to crash economies with the same people at the wheel? I don't think you're getting this. You can't simply make a claim based on nothing but fantasy and then expect it to be taken as valid just because you made it. In order to be taken seriously, you have to back up these claims with evidence. You haven't. Capitalism creates nothing other than imaginary money and debt. People create wealth; workers, artists, teachers, plumbers, shop assistants, airline pilots create wealth; capitalism only reduces that wealth. Utter and absolute nonsense. I thought you were going to stop making absurd claims without evidence? So let's have the evidence that shows the NHS to have been 'wholly inefficient and wasteful ' prior to the beginning of privatisiation in England. Then I'll show you the evidence which proves it was and still is amongst the best and most efficient health care systems on earth. You'll notice that I say in England, since the NHS in Scotland is a very different animal to that in the south and has a much more favourable public approval rate than its English counterpart; but then that's only to be expected since NHS Scotland has been run by the SNP for the benefit of the patients rather than the benefit of private companies for the past 8 years. It's really not. Welfare capitalism refers to the situation whereby large companies take over some of the functions that otherwise would be provided by the state. The best examples of this would be Japanese companies who traditonally paid for employees families health care and education amongst other things. The Scandanavian model you're refering to is one whereby the State gets involved to ensure that companies contribute their fair share to society; in other words, the State acts as a brake on the excesses of capitalism which are encouraged in the Anglo-Saxon world. Free market activity is positively encouraged in those countries (Ikea? Nokia anyone?) but the companies are forced by the State to behave as socially responsible citizens. Maybe the following will help you define your terms better: You have two cows.... Socialism: You have 2 cows. You give one to your neighbour. Communism: You have 2 cows. The state takes both and gives you some milk. Fascism: You have 2 cows. The state takes both and sells you some milk. Nazism: You have 2 cows. The state takes both and shoots you. Bureaucratism: You have 2 cows. The state takes both, shoots one, milks the other and then throws the milk away. Traditional Capitalism: You have 2 cows. You sell one and buy a bull. Your herd multiples and the economy grows. You sell them and retire on the income. American Capitalism: You have 2 cows. You sell one, and force the other to produce the milk of four cows. Later, you hire a consultant to analyse why the cow has dropped dead. Enron Venture Capitalism: You have 2 cows. You sell 3 of them to your publicly listed company using letters of credit opened by your brother-in-law at the bank, then execute a debt/equity swap with an associated general offer so that you get all four cows back, with tax exemption for five cows. The milk rights of the six cows are transferred via an intermediary to a Cayman Island Company secretly owned by the majority shareholder who sells the rights to all seven cows back to your listed company. The annual report says the company owns eight cows, with an option on one more. You sell one cow to buy a new president of the United States, leaving you with nine cows. No balance sheet provided with the release. The public then buys your bull. French Capitalism: You have 2 cows. You go on strike, organise a riot and block the roads because you want 3 cows. Japanese Capitalism: You have 2 cows. You redesign them so they are 1/10 the size of an ordinary cows and produce twenty times the milk. You then create a clever cow cartoon image called ‘Cowkimon’ and market it worldwide. German Capitalism: You have 2 cows. You re-engineer them so they live for 100 years, eat once a month and milk themselves. Italian Capitalism: You have 2 cows, but you don’t know where they are. You decide to have lunch. Russian Capitalism: You have 2 cows. You count them and learn that you have 5 cows. You count again and learn you have 42 cows. You count again and learn you have 2 cows. You open another bottle of vodka. Swiss Capitalism: You have 5000 cows. None of them belong to you. You charge the owners for storing them and keep quiet about any milk they produce. Chinese Capitalism: You have 2 cows. You have 300 people milking them. You claim that you have a full employment and and high bovine productivity. You arrest the journalist who reports otherwise. Indian Capitalism: You have 2 cows. You worship them. British Capitalism: You have 2 cows. Both are mad. Iraqi Capitalism: Everyone thinks you have many cows. You tell them you have none but they don’t believe you and bomb the shit out of your farm. You still have no cows, but at least you are part of a democracy.
  7. Capitalism is the pusuit of capital by private individuals. That doesn't ever change and never will. What you've described in the first paragraph are changes to social structure and market economies and ways in which the state has attempted to constrain capitalism for its own purposes. You have not described changes to capitalism. In your 2nd paragraph you manage to completely contradict yourself and destroy your own argument within the space of 10 words. I'm not sure it that's a record, but it's certainly an achievement. Capitalism has learned from the crash of 2008 so Bankers can't cause another crash - but another crash is inevitable? I think you need to work on that a bit more. Any changes that have been brought about to control bankers (changes brought about by the EU, btw, not the bankers buddies in westminster) have been brought baout by the state in order to try to control capitalism; not as some form of capitalist evolution. In your 3rd paragraph you admit to not having any examples of how Capitalism has solved any problems; quite at odd with your bold claim of the previous post. Capitalism does not create either resources or anything else; it exploits them and does so for its own benefit, not for the greater good. Take the NHS. Under public ownership the NHS was the most economically efficient health care system in the world. The NHS in England is becoming more and more privatised and less and less efficient. American health care spends twice as much as we do for a far less efficient system. As for capitalism helping those with the gumption to achieve; Are you aware that the least socially mobile countries in the developed world are the UK and the US - those places where capitalism is practiced most freely - and the countries with the greatest social mobility are Denmark, Norway and Finland - societies where capitalism is most heavily controlled, where taxation is high and so is the national happiness index? All of the Scandanavian countries rank higher in OECD quality of life surveys than either the US or UK.
  8. Only, you're not just changing the costume; you're changing the entire scenario. The shove in the back was violent conduct pure and simple and Erwin deserved everything he got. Mohsni should have received a three match ban for violent conduct and not a minute more. The fact that he has been so heavily punished and the Motherwell mob, for that is what they were, got off practically scot free can be put down only to the teams they play for.
  9. Really? I'd be keen to know exactly how Capitalism has changed and evolved and to the solution of which problems this has lead.
  10. Written in a time when the butcher and baker lived in the communities they served and in which their own interests would co-incide with those of their communities. You can work out for yourself what happens when the capital owning classes no longer come from or live in the communities which depend on them for employment. Those communities become 'resources' to be exploited. They don't need the hospitals since they have private healthcare; they don't need the schools since their offspring are privately educated; they don't need the police since they have their ownsecurity systems, so they don't need to pay their taxes and nor do they. They pay minimum wage, which means we have to pay higher taxes to pay for working tax credits so families can survive, they dodge taxes wherever they can so we have to pay more to make up the shortfall and they are more than happy to devastate communities at the stroke of a pen because they have no connection to those people. Uncontrolled capitalism provides nothing but social and cultural suicide.
  11. We know where the towers went. All 3 collapsed at near freefall speed through the path of greatest resistance, reaching the ground in much the same time as a bowling ball would if you dropped it from the top of the building. Tch. Physics, eh? It's just so bloody unpredictable. For centuries they tell you one thing, then out of the blue, the laws of nature change 180 degrees. And they tell you that stuff like time travel isn't possible either, but, how else could the BBC broadcast that tower 7 had collapsed when in fact we could see Tower 7 standing tall as you like over the reporter's right shoulder. Obviously they'd travelled forward in time to witness the collapse then travelled backward in time to broadcast that the tower had collapsed - despite the fact that it was still standing. There. Over there, dear. To your right. Look behind you. The big 47 storey building? That's the one. Mind you, the suspension of these laws of nature was only for that one day. So, that's good. You might want to be wary of the goofier side of this - there are a lot of nutters and people spreading disinformation; but have a look at some sites like http://www1.ae911truth.org/ where Architects and Engineers debunk the official conspiracy story or Airline pilots at http://www.pilotsfor911truth.org/.
  12. In other words, he'll be a Rangers player by the end of next week.
  13. I think the Motherwell fans are simply magnificent. Not only did they sit on their hands and keep quiet to police and stewards about this group of Rangers fans sitting in their midst during what has been described as the most important game in their club's history, but even after this group of rowdy huns had disgraced themselves by throwing a flare, the 'Well fans continued to remain silent and gathered round their bluenosed enemy, protecting them from being lifted by the long arm of the law. But then, if this wasn't admirable enough, once the game had finished these very same exemplars of sportsmanship ran over en masse to commiserate with the Rangers fans and to applaud them warmly and with sporting affection and to wish us a speedy return to the top flight. Good on the Record for bringing these wonderful deeds to light.
  14. That's got to be my favourite Rangers strip ever. Just beautiful.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.