You support Bush?

Zoombie · Post by **Zoombie** » 14 Oct 2006, 00:06

Darwinisms is fine until you are the one staring death in the face. But its easier to get a damn job then starve to death, I suppose. Now a LEGAL job...they need to get a legal job, damn it!

Decimator · Post by **Decimator** » 14 Oct 2006, 00:09

We have soup ------- anyway. No person in this country has any excuse to starve to death. Our poor are obese for crying out loud!

SwiftSpear · Post by **SwiftSpear** » 14 Oct 2006, 00:13

Decimator wrote:We have soup ------- anyway. No person in this country has any excuse to starve to death. Our poor are obese for crying out loud!

Soup ------- don't bathe and shelter people, and they couldn't manage the volume if welfare were to suddenly cease existing. You get really dirty and stinky then try to go get a job. Welfare given to responsible but down on their luck people is one of the only things that offsets this. In your country healthy food is 4 times the price of garbage...

Zoombie · Post by **Zoombie** » 14 Oct 2006, 00:14

Thats why I love America. Even our poor are fat!

Decimator · Post by **Decimator** » 14 Oct 2006, 00:16

Who said anything about sudden? Obviously you can't just shut it off, you'd have to slowly draw it down or you'd have riots in the streets.

Keithus · Post by **Keithus** » 14 Oct 2006, 00:49

I'm pretty keen to move to America (The USA cause the other countries dont count). That way I work at a high pay job and live off soup -------, dodge taxes as much as possible and perhaps run a drug scheme off the side for extra money

.

On another note I think than less than 2% of all the USA's Government money goes into foreign aid whereas most countries I beleive are in the 5-10% region. On another note though New Zealands Foreign Aid is about the 2% mark aswell

.

P.S New Zealands price of pertrol per litre works out to be something like $5.30 American per Gallon last time I did the math and our petrol tax rates are like %27 methinks.

Dam It would be nice to live in the USA though, cheap living expenses.

Decimator · Post by **Decimator** » 14 Oct 2006, 01:35

Our gas tax is only allowed to go to roads, at least in my state. Hence, it's fairly cheap.

LOrDo · Post by **LOrDo** » 14 Oct 2006, 06:22

Intresting...4x as many anti-bushies as bushies....

SpikedHelmet · Post by **SpikedHelmet** » 14 Oct 2006, 06:27

Lol, I love your Logic there BlackLiger.

"Oh noes! The answer "NO" is above "YES!" THIS POLL IS BIASED!"

Ignoramus.

LathanStanley · Post by **LathanStanley** » 14 Oct 2006, 07:32

LOrDo wrote:Intresting...4x as many anti-bushies as bushies....

WELL.... 90% of the rest of the world HATES him, and yeah, this is an intenational board...

more than half the US citizens like him..

sooo, trust me, he's fine where he's at, wether you like it or not...

Neddie · Post by **Neddie** » 14 Oct 2006, 08:07

Actually, no, less than 40% like him these days, and I've always had reason to believe those polls were skewed in his favour.

LOrDo · Post by **LOrDo** » 14 Oct 2006, 08:26

I may not know much, but I know for certain that bushes popularity has gone way down since last election.

Lathan...if 90% of the rest of the world hates him, have you ever considered perhaps hes not fine where hes at?

Perhaps they hate him for a REASON?

mr sharpoblunto · Post by **mr sharpoblunto** » 14 Oct 2006, 13:21

Decimator wrote:hunger is a great and powerful motivator. People will not starve and die, they will get hungry, go work, make money, and eat.

Blanket statements such as these only serve to show that you have put little thought into what in actuality are complex issues. These sorts of issues are best resolved through reaching a careful equilibrium as opposed to sweeping knee jerk changes because of the amount of variables involved (hmmm, sounds a bit like modding

).

For a start, the idea of full employment in an economy is not a desirable situation; having some level of unemployment ensures that the job market remains flexible and competitive. Essentially unemployment acts like a buffer in the labour market, If the buffer runs out then there is no room for economic growth. Changing levels of unemployment also affect the relative power between employers and employees. If the balance swings to far either way then one ends up being exploited by the other, though as is the case with the market system it usually finds an equilibrium point which in a healthy economy tends to be a small percentage of the total workforce (but is essentially never zero).

Full employment is also undesirable for another important reason, namely that in some cases more resources are expended to get some people to work than you get from the work they produce. This is unavoidable, some people for whatever reason are just not worth employing.

So why not just dump the unemployed on the street and be done with it? Well I'm sure these unemployable induviduals are not going to want to starve (hunger being motivating), but they can't maintain any form of employment, so they resort to crime in order to survive.

Okay so lock em up! Well that may seem like a solution to the problem at its face, but imprisonment brings with it a number of issues. The first of these is that emprisonment tends to lock people into a cycle of reoffending, the second is that imprisoning people is expensive! you have to pay for prisons, guards 24/7, all thier food etc. etc.

However offering some level of welfare means that some of these induviduals will be less likely to commit crimes as they can afford to live. In addition its alot cheaper to pay someone welfare than it is to A) force them to work, or B) imprison them (here in $NZ it costs around $50000NZD to keep someone in prison per year, however the unemployment benefit for an individual costs less than a fifth of this)

Often these sorts of issues have counter intuitive solutions, for example in many countries Heroin addicts turn to crime in order to support their habit. By providing government sponsored clinics where junkies can shoot up for free means these induviduals no longer have to commit crimes benefiting the economy as a whole, offsetting the costs of the program. Studies made in Switzerland and the Netherlands have shown this to be the case and a number of countries (such as the UK and Canada) are considering adopting ideas along these lines (though theres a whole lot of other complications involved with this idea... its just an example)

Anyway thats my two cents, I'm just saying that you can't always portray issues as black and white, things are often a bit more complicated.

... thats probably why I don't support Bush

Decimator · Post by **Decimator** » 14 Oct 2006, 14:47

If you can run a shovel or pick peppers, you won't starve.

Well, first of all, a prisoner should be worked so hard that he doesn't have time for mischief while also highly offsetting his cost. The way we treat prisoners now is rediculous. Second, buckshot to the face is a great deterrent for anyone wanting to commit a crime. And third, welfare already promotes crime: http://www.jesbeard.com/w4.htm

Cabbage · Post by **Cabbage** » 14 Oct 2006, 15:14

I think it's funny that we (americans) think it's a crisis with gas prices at $3, and I hear (I dunno if it's true) that gas prices in the UK have been $5 for years.

Petrol prices have fallen a bit over the last few weeks, i was in the U.S. not long ago and it was about $2.50 a Gallon in most places, but i'll compare prices to how they were say a month and a half ago..

Say $3 per gallon in the U.S.

About ├é┬ú1 per LITRE at hte same time in the U.K.

Roughly, there are four litres in a Gallon (a little more infact, but i cant remember the exact number) so say ├é┬ú4 per gallon.

The exhange rate is pretty much $1.90 = ├é┬ú1 atm, and adding a small amount from the conservative litre/gallon conversion pretty much makes it over $8.00 a gallon over here. It worked out at nearly $10.00 a gallon compared to some petrol stations a few months ago

Lucky for us the U.K and most of Europe use much higher quality fuel (93 - 97 octane rather than 87) and get much better mileage and performance as a result... that and we don't drive cars that are about as efficent as a.. grughh! must resist!

SwiftSpear · Post by **SwiftSpear** » 14 Oct 2006, 15:21

Decimator wrote:If you can run a shovel or pick peppers, you won't starve.

Well, first of all, a prisoner should be worked so hard that he doesn't have time for mischief while also highly offsetting his cost. The way we treat prisoners now is rediculous. Second, buckshot to the face is a great deterrent for anyone wanting to commit a crime. And third, welfare already promotes crime: http://www.jesbeard.com/w4.htm

If you have virtually any type of medical dysfunction that requires medicine this isn't true any more. Minimum wage jobs don't provide enough money to shelter, bathe, clothe, feed, and cover medical costs for most continuing problems. Substitute the medical problem in with virtually any other common situation: an addiction to anything, children, loved one you need to support, large dept.

[edit] That article is retarded. I could feel my intelligence drop as I read it. It's like bad math, he's stating that 2+2=5.

Decimator · Post by **Decimator** » 14 Oct 2006, 15:28

Mind if we send you the bill for people who don't plan ahead?

Like I said earlier people physically unable to work should be an exception, and even they can get jobs, it's just harder. Like the quadraplegic at my church, he has a job. Children and loved ones are also perfectly capable of working, asssuming they aren't toddlers. They can do things at home, so the other has more time to make money.

As for needing unemployed people, sharpoblunto, population growth and immigration work great for that.

SwiftSpear wrote:That article is retarded. I could feel my intelligence drop as I read it. It's like bad math, he's stating that 2+2=5.

Refute it then.

Guessmyname · Post by **Guessmyname** » 14 Oct 2006, 15:34

SpikedHelmet wrote:Lol, I love your Logic there BlackLiger.

"Oh noes! The answer "NO" is above "YES!" THIS POLL IS BIASED!"

Ignoramus.

Whilst I wouldn't have put it like that, no being above yes is hardly going to affect the results. Unless you're the sort of idiot who simply chooses the first option without thinking, in which you're an idiot.

It doesn't affect the results at all, and to say that poll creator is biased is to say he has an opinion, which, said poll creater being a person (to our knowledge), is not that suprising.

pintle · Post by **pintle** » 14 Oct 2006, 15:47

Decimator wrote: Second, buckshot to the face is a great deterrent for anyone wanting to commit a crime. [/url]

Ima have to do it, you made me use the F word

fascist.

Decimator · Post by **Decimator** » 14 Oct 2006, 15:52

I have an F word of my own: Fail.

The Dictionary wrote:fas‧cism /ˈf├â┬ªʃɪzəm/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[fash-iz-uhm] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
├óÔé¼ÔÇ£noun
1. (sometimes initial capital letter) a governmental system led by a dictator having complete power, forcibly suppressing opposition and criticism, regimenting all industry, commerce, etc., and emphasizing an aggressive nationalism and often racism.
2. (sometimes initial capital letter) the philosophy, principles, or methods of fascism.
3. (initial capital letter) a fascist movement, esp. the one established by Mussolini in Italy 1922├óÔé¼ÔÇ£43.

Spring RTS Engine

You support Bush?

You support Bush?