|
Is Bill Gates a Greedy Bastard?
|
|
| eboyd |
Date: Wednesday, 20/Jan/10, 11:04 PM | Message # 451 |
Heads
Posts: 13145
|
Quote (J-Breakz) The govn't granted native americans reservations for them to live on. Why did many decide to build casinos rather than go back to the lifestyle they were living before? was it because they were brainwashed? The Indians were displaced from their lands and forced to live like "civilized" people back in 1871. Indian tribes were no longer recognized as legitimate and they were forced to either get homes in American society or live as homeless bums. It wasn't until the 1900's (I believe the 30's) that the reservations were even created. That means that 30-60 years passed before they were given a choice on whether or not to continue to live tribally. Think about this now: would you begin living tribally as someone who was raised in a "civilized" society? No, you wouldn't. Why? Because it isn't something you are accustomed to. This was a society in which no one had any knowledge of tribal life except maybe a few but even them hadn't lived tribally in at least 30 years.
my new theme song
erikboyd60@hotmail.com
"True poetry can communicate before it is understood"
-T.S. Eliot
battle record:
7-0-0
|
|
|
|
| J-Breakz |
Date: Wednesday, 20/Jan/10, 11:04 PM | Message # 452 |
Heads
Posts: 2162
|
Quote (eboyd) The Indians were displaced from their lands and forced to live like "civilized" people back in 1871. Indian tribes were no longer recognized as legitimate and they were forced to either get homes in American society or live as homeless bums. It wasn't until the 1900's (I believe the 30's) that the reservations were even created. That means that 30-60 years passed before they were given a choice on whether or not to continue to live tribally. Think about this now: would you begin living tribally as someone who was raised in a "civilized" society? No, you wouldn't. Why? Because it isn't something you are accustomed to. This was a society in which no one had any knowledge of tribal life except maybe a few but even them hadn't lived tribally in at least 30 years.
I can go to an indian reservation and be educated by native americans on how they used to live before the white man came. I have actually in 6th grade camp by a women (who was like 16th native american and the rest white but was offended when I called her white, lol). If they truly wanted to live how they used to they can on indian reservations. If it's difficult to adjust yourself it may be because capitalism is a much easier way to live. This is off topic though. You haven't answered my question either about extended usership. Quote (J-Breakz) I have never heard of extended usership, and it sounds like it would be completely against what you stand for. How long are people allowed to leave a space vacant until it's not considered extended usership?
livin life like some cheesy movie
|
|
|
|
| I_Guy |
Date: Wednesday, 20/Jan/10, 11:05 PM | Message # 453 |
Heads
Posts: 1792
|
Quote (J-Breakz) enlighten me. what about the omish? How would capitalis white society around the natives crush them out?
First of all they would be given restricted land. Wildlife would be limited in this land making hunting difficult. The natural temptation to gravitate to that which is easyness (lazyness) of consumption capitalism would affect them. Many Amish communities have given in and buy goods from local towns, because their way of life only exists in their little village as opposed to there being a network of villages that share their way of life. Beings they are alone, there is no trade like their used to be. Therefore they are forced to get some things from cities or town markets. Natives would suffer a similar problem. Quote (J-Breakz) So then owners of land would make an attempt to take care of the property so that the value stays high when they choose to sell it.
But they could care less about other peoples land or what they may in up doing to it. I wouldn't be surprised if they routed damaging factors onto other peoples land. Besides what the hell do you mean "take care" of it? Make it look pretty? <_< Quote (J-Breakz) The number of elephants increased from 30,000 to 43,000 as their owners became fiercely protective of their "property."
And why were they owning them? To play fetch? Quote (J-Breakz) Because ranchers are only renting the land, they have no incentive to take care of it.
And private industry also rents out land. Quote (J-Breakz) "For example, the Bureau of Land Management controls an area almost twice the size of Texas, including nearly all of Alaska and Nevada. Much of this land is rented to ranchers for grazing cattle. Because ranchers are only renting the land, they have no incentive to take care of it. Not surprisingly, studies as early as 1925 indicated that cattle were twice as likely to die on public ranges and had half as many calves as animals grazing on private lands."
"Obviously, owners make better environmental guardians than renters. If the government sold its acreage to private ranchers, the new owners would make sure that they grazed the land sustainably to maximize profit and yield."
None of that means anything. This is another example of capitalist advocates assuming that they can predict human nature. They make their predictions by optimistically assuming that human nature will always be for the good and flawless. They forget that human nature can be unpredictable and at times neurotic. It doesn't always follow as we would like it to. That's one of the main problem with capitalism. It assumes the good side of human nature. Any system that does this fails miserably. A system should take precautions against the downsides to better fortify the system. Any system that doesn't do this, leaves weak points in the system. It is obvious that no system is perfect, but if a system is to be implemented, it should consider the weaknesses of human nature. In a way, you could say that it would work like skepticism works in science. Quote (J-Breakz) I can go to an indian reservation and be educated by native americans on how they used to live before the white man came
Much of the real history is lost by filtering through generations. The information they would give you might be not be the most accurate, but this irrelevant.
We all know that each of our end is near; the question is do we accept the end of our living existence, or do we accept our existence as dead men...
|
|
|
|
| J-Breakz |
Date: Wednesday, 20/Jan/10, 11:05 PM | Message # 454 |
|
Heads
Posts: 2162
|
Quote (I_Guy) irst of all they would be given restricted land. Wildlife would be limited in this land making hunting difficult. The natural temptation to gravitate to that which is easyness (lazyness) of consumption capitalism would affect them. Many Amish communities have given in and buy goods from local towns, because their way of life only exists in their little village as opposed to there being a network of villages that share their way of life. Beings they are alone, there is no trade like their used to be. Therefore they are forced to get some things from cities or town markets. Natives would suffer a similar problem.
This sounds like your confusing imperialism with capitalism. Quote (I_Guy) But they could care less about other peoples land or what they may in up doing to it. I wouldn't be surprised if they routed damaging factors onto other peoples land. Besides what the hell do you mean "take care" of it? Make it look pretty? <_<
But other people would take care of their land. If they routed damaging factors onto other peoples land then the other people could prosecute them for trespassing. By "take care" of it I mean take care of the environment. If the environment of the land goes to shit then the value goes down.
Quote (I_Guy) And why were they owning them? To play fetch?
They owned the elephants because they wanted to protect the species. It's the same reason why there are groups that buy forests purely to preserve the land. Quote (I_Guy) None of that means anything. This is another example of capitalist advocates assuming that they can predict human nature. They make their predictions by optimistically assuming that human nature will always be for the good and flawless. They forget that human nature can be unpredictable and at times neurotic. It doesn't always follow as we would like it to. That's one of the main problem with capitalism. It assumes the good side of human nature. Any system that does this fails miserably. A system should take precautions against the downsides to better fortify the system. Any system that doesn't do this, leaves weak points in the system. It is obvious that no system is perfect, but if a system is to be implemented, it should consider the weaknesses of human nature. In a way, you could say that it would work like skepticism works in science.
But capitalism has it so the good side of human nature is rewarded and the bad is punished.
livin life like some cheesy movie
|
|
|
|
| I_Guy |
Date: Wednesday, 20/Jan/10, 11:05 PM | Message # 455 |
|
Heads
Posts: 1792
|
Quote (J-Breakz) If the environment of the land goes to shit then the value goes down.
That's happening right now and land value is doing just fine. As long as they make it look pretty, people buy it, no matter how infected the land is. Quote (J-Breakz) They owned the elephants because they wanted to protect the species. It's the same reason why there are groups that buy forests purely to preserve the land.
What does that have to do with capitalism? That's simply enviromentalism. Sure they may have bought the land to own it, but that's the only way due to the grip of capitalism. Quote (J-Breakz) But capitalism has it so the good side of human nature is rewarded and the bad is punished.
The bad should be prevented. Or at least made difficult to arise. (admittedly, that may be too much to ask) Nevertheless, capitalism allows for the bad to easily arise.
We all know that each of our end is near; the question is do we accept the end of our living existence, or do we accept our existence as dead men...
|
|
|
|
| J-Breakz |
Date: Wednesday, 20/Jan/10, 11:05 PM | Message # 456 |
|
Heads
Posts: 2162
|
Quote (I_Guy) That's happening right now and land value is doing just fine. As long as they make it look pretty, people buy it, no matter how infected the land is.
How is land value doing just fine? Land price is completely off balance with the value. That's because of government intervention and there's many reasons why it's like that. But still areas with high pollution are on average cheaper than areas with low pollution. Quote (I_Guy) What does that have to do with capitalism? That's simply enviromentalism. Sure they may have bought the land to own it, but that's the only way due to the grip of capitalism.
It has to do with specifically private property. There's evidence showing that when land isn't owned by people then the environment is not cared for. Quote (I_Guy) Nevertheless, capitalism allows for the bad to easily arise.
Like I said, good is rewarded and bad is punished making it illogical for bad to arise and sustain itself. The person hurting other people also hurt themselves in capitalism.
livin life like some cheesy movie
|
|
|
|
| I_Guy |
Date: Wednesday, 20/Jan/10, 11:05 PM | Message # 457 |
|
Heads
Posts: 1792
|
Quote (J-Breakz) Like I said, good is rewarded and bad is punished making it illogical for bad to arise and sustain itself. The person hurting other people also hurt themselves in capitalism.
Capitalism actually gives incentive to do bad.
We all know that each of our end is near; the question is do we accept the end of our living existence, or do we accept our existence as dead men...
|
|
|
|
| J-Breakz |
Date: Wednesday, 20/Jan/10, 11:05 PM | Message # 458 |
|
Heads
Posts: 2162
|
Quote (I_Guy)
Capitalism actually gives incentive to do bad.
If that's the case then it doesn't make sense that taiwan has the lowest poverty in the world.
livin life like some cheesy movie
|
|
|
|
| J-Breakz |
Date: Wednesday, 20/Jan/10, 11:06 PM | Message # 459 |
|
Heads
Posts: 2162
|
Bump Quote (J-Breakz)
I have never heard of extended usership, and it sounds like it would be completely against what you stand for. How long are people allowed to leave a space vacant until it's not considered extended usership?
livin life like some cheesy movie
|
|
|
|
| I_Guy |
Date: Wednesday, 20/Jan/10, 11:06 PM | Message # 460 |
|
Heads
Posts: 1792
|
Quote (J-Breakz) If that's the case then it doesn't make sense that taiwan has the lowest poverty in the world.
Capitalism exploits a monetary system. A monetary system is corrupt to begin with. You need to reexamine the monetary system before you start speaking on behalf of capitalism.
We all know that each of our end is near; the question is do we accept the end of our living existence, or do we accept our existence as dead men...
|
|
|
|
| J-Breakz |
Date: Wednesday, 20/Jan/10, 11:06 PM | Message # 461 |
|
Heads
Posts: 2162
|
Quote (I_Guy) Capitalism exploits a monetary system. A monetary system is corrupt to begin with. You need to reexamine the monetary system before you start speaking on behalf of capitalism.
There was corruption and greed before money. Like I said before capitalism encourages good and punishes bad. What would be better than a monetary sytem? what type of society utilizes a non-monetary system that has been better than capitalism?
livin life like some cheesy movie
|
|
|
|
| I_Guy |
Date: Wednesday, 20/Jan/10, 11:06 PM | Message # 462 |
|
Heads
Posts: 1792
|
Quote (J-Breakz) Like I said before capitalism encourages good and punishes bad.
Capitalism opens up a collosal door for curruption because it plays to mankind's most selfish desires. Have you not seen Zeitgeist Addendum? If so what did you think?
We all know that each of our end is near; the question is do we accept the end of our living existence, or do we accept our existence as dead men...
|
|
|
|
| J-Breakz |
Date: Wednesday, 20/Jan/10, 11:06 PM | Message # 463 |
|
Heads
Posts: 2162
|
Quote (I_Guy) Capitalism opens up a collosal door for curruption
Capitalism or Fascism? Quote (I_Guy) Have you not seen Zeitgeist Addendum? If so what did you think?
No I haven't, I've heard and read a lil about it though. Apparently it's filled with conspiracy theories, attacks on religion, and the confusion of fascism with capitalism.
livin life like some cheesy movie
|
|
|
|
| I_Guy |
Date: Wednesday, 20/Jan/10, 11:06 PM | Message # 464 |
|
Heads
Posts: 1792
|
Quote (J-Breakz) Apparently it's filled with conspiracy theories, attacks on religion, and the confusion of fascism with capitalism.
I have heard and read that too. But you have to look at who these opinions are coming from. In most cases it is coming from people who support the things the film criticizes. As far as the conspiricies go, it is only miniscule. It only hints at the conspiracy of 9/11. It doesn't spend time on it. Don't confuse Zeitgeist Addendum with the other film "Zeitgeist: The Movie" which does talk about it, though I have not seen that one. Zeitgeist Addendum focuses on the monetary system, corporations, government, and religion. Sure it will sound like conspiracy theories to someone who is sucked into the ignorant vortex headed into the oblivion of media distortion and modern escapism. Most people who talk shit on the film only do so because they are ignorant about philosophical and political environments. I will admit, the film does sound like some kind of unhinged conspiracy theory, and the film addresses that itself. But once you analyze the film you realize that it doesn't have any elements that align with conspiracy theorist criteria. It only seems like a conspiracy doc because it talks about complicated issues that seem backwards and unbelievable at first hearing. But once you do your own research and analysis you realize that the unbelievability is simply a first reaction and that much of what it talks about is horrifying but true. The only legitimate criticisms it has recieved has been from critics who attacks the referencing of sources the film gives. It leaves out some sources, and includes some sources that are a bit obscure. But much of the film is a work of logic so it really needs few sources if people are wiling to think it through. And there's nothing wrong with attacking religion. It surely does not confuse fascism with capitalism. It draws distinctions repeatedly. But all in all, even if the whole film is one big conspiracy flick, the truth of the matter concerns its logical statements about money and religion, and what we need to do to fix the issues they create. All the other source referencing and other criticisms become petty in the light of the deeper philosophies of the film. The last third of the film is the most effective and insightful. The interviews with Jacque Fresco epitomize it.
We all know that each of our end is near; the question is do we accept the end of our living existence, or do we accept our existence as dead men...
|
|
|
|
| J-Breakz |
Date: Wednesday, 20/Jan/10, 11:07 PM | Message # 465 |
|
Heads
Posts: 2162
|
I'll watch the documentary and give you my thoughts on it tomorrow
livin life like some cheesy movie
|
|
|
|
