Xard

Thanks for providing perfect opening for "attack"! Individual rights can mean many things - what if rather limited set of rights of libertarians isn't the whole truth and is build on hopelessly idealistic view of human nature, just like communist one? Lack of regulation? Well yeah, individuals in market can in my view **** things just as well as goverment. We're all humans. Big words. Ever considered, even for a moment, that you might be wrong sometimes? What if market isn't the perfect, solipstic, ever itself repairing wonder machine that gets automatically ****ed up when snake - goverment - slithers into the paradise? I can be c*cky but when it comes to economics you take it to wholly new level, especially with all your "rationality" spouting when you follow switz school which doesn't actually have hard science and maths behind it! Thanks for admitting your own bigotry (I've never read Marx and barely any Chomsky btw) when it comes to your sources; the libertarian fallacy about this crisis being due to goverment has been vindicated critically in many different places here in Finland; I've read finnish economics (not of the keynesian-type btw!) admit it was failure of market many times. Some people have balls to do that due to not having their entire ideologies at stake. And it is entirely reasonable conclusion - except for the ideology of "MARKETS CAN'T BE WRONG GOVERMENT DON'T WORK HUR HUR ALL HAIL GURU". It's also funny how this whole libertarian thinking relies on notion of "perfect market condition" which is nothing more than theoretical supposition utterly removed from real life. How one can build one's worldview on la la land of perfect flow of information on utterly correct balance of supply and demand is ridiculous. Ain't gonna happen. Some english links here and here. You guys really hit low point when attacking Act from 70's as cause behind current crisis... but hey, it can't be the market! It was the goverment, some way or another! So how *exactly* is UN trying to violate your rights? Yeah, you work 12 hours a day to bring money to your family, fearing for illness of any serious sort that would immeaditly demolish your meager financial standing as you can't afford health insurances in these hard times. Then you get laid off as apparently company could make even more profits with shift to China and use of child working power (not that something as politically incorrect as last part is found from any papers!). At the same time you ready to tell news for your wife (and fearing you go all Hollis Brown on her and kids) the CEO gives himself nice, "little" raise in form of options as he is so goddamn good at keeping growth on. My my lad, you should've just worked harder! American dream is just around corner for you! curse these taxes, I don't get anything for paying them! I don't know, isn't it self-deception to build moral standings on amoral, even predatory system utilizing little green papers? wow, talk about remembering what you want. I never got around answer (or whole forums) due to various reasons that aren't exactly your (or anyone else's ) business - I never said "NO I CANNOT ANSWER YOU =( " uhh, what if you're also providing healthcare for yourself with the same payment? Libertarianism is only rational and consistent when taken to its extreme anarchistic variable and even there you end up with dilemma of freedom that "plagues" all anarchistic philosophies. So, you want moral ground for taxing, progressive taxing and social justice and rights as well as reason(s) why you can't build morals on money and "ownership" rights alone? Fine, you'll get them tomorrow after I come back from visiting some family members in pre-Christmas visit. "How noble libertarianism, in its majestic equality, that both rich and poor are equally prohibited from peeing in the privately owned streets (without paying), sleeping under the privately owned bridges (without paying), and coercing bread from its rightful owners!"

not sure what you mean about this, but you told me that if your government would not implement your form of oppression (which you clearly stated that you wanted to enforce certain behaviors) you would go somewhere else where the government would. What "certain behaviors"? Not breaking laws by, for example, commiting homicide? Paying taxes? i wasn't resurrecting a many months old topic, i was resurrecting your hypocrisy. And I was merely explaining why I never got back to debate. But with you always running in circles with these same old matters like true pure hearted libertarian should (making as much noise as possible in process) I guess it'll never end. because the UN advocates oppression within its own constitution. the UN wants a socialist world, that is, as i've stated on many occasions, evil by any standard. while the US practices it, at the very least we have a document that does not. that our government chooses not to abide by said document is something i truly detest. Ahh yes, the great evil of "socialism"! Let me guess you still believe this current economical crisis is due to "goverment meddling with business" too? "The United Nations (UN) is an international organization whose stated aims are to facilitate cooperation in international law, international security, economic development, social progress, human rights and achieving world peace." Interesting. How one can see any of these aims as oppression is rather intriguing. And that mischievous working class back in the 19th century, they were surely evil lot motivated by want to oppress those pitiful well faring folks. Isn't it rather interesting libertarian nutjobbery always arises among the people with good to great income? I've never heard of poor, barely surviving black woman advocating evils of social justice. Have you? "Socialist" = oppression = evil this is still basis of your views. "Oppression" = taxes, "redistribution of wealth", social justice I'm correct again, right? Thus my verdict about this all ultimately being about morality of taxing and esp. progressive taxing is correct. Heck, I remember you demanding me to give moral backing for taxing so don't give me that "not sure what you mean about this" crap. You're free of course to point out where I went wrong with your views.

you tell me despite the jokish tone I've become increasingly open to reincarnation in past months

huh? Esbj

David Bowie - Breaking Glass You're such a wonderful person But you got problems oh-oh-oh-oh I'll never touch you

First I thought it was meh Now I've been listening it non-stop for whole day like true junkie

I recently read article on homosexuality on science magazine and basically it boils down to A) with women it's pretty much no genetics at all and instead choice and enviroment. B) with men it seems to be more "hardwired" but no one knows how However, judgin from the article and numerous controversies I think "gay gene" and such is just more reductionistic, materialist bull**** like, for example, "god gene" or "god spot" or "god circuit" or whatever one prefers as explanation of religion. Oh, and as for someone being gay once and for all as it is hard wired: too bad hard wiring doens't exist in human brain. I worry one day these anti-gay movements will tap on neuroplasticity and will twist it to use it in literally reprogramming sexuality. IF SEXUALITY DEPENDS ON BRAIN. But then we'd end up talking religiously about "souls" and stuff and that's no to srs scientist talk, yes siire When one can rewire him/herself to basically "see" with frickin tongue changing something as ambiguous and unspecific as sexuality...well, theoretically entirely possible, even very likely to succeed. The obvious supremacy of "nurture" versus "nature" in lesbianism just works as further case in point. Explanation for homosexuality: Brain? of course, partially. However, unfortunately for materialists and determinists phenomenoms such as neuroplasticity are absolutely killing the "you're born with brain that works like this and it will work like till you die" model of thinking. Thus if homosexuality is due to neurological mapping = there's no such thing as absolute homosexuality. Same applies to "male brain" and "female brain". Genes? Now how would genes achieve this? Through the brain of course and thus above reasons apply here too. Not to mention "genetic determinism" is pretty much pop media bs. Nurture scored a big one in the debate some months ago when people with similar genetics had different genes becoming active based on enviroment. One could of course make shaky case out of it as person choosing homosexuality and thus "activating" certain genes. Bus as said, there's not much hard proof behind genetics Enviroment? NO NO NO and yet yes as above points prove. But enviroment can't be the biggest deciding factor, at least when it comes to men. ----------------------------------------------- Conclusion 1: sexuality is not fixed and is ambiguous, shaping force of human psyche that apparently can't be entirely reduced to biology. Freud's libido would be so proud of itself... OR Conclusion 2: we just don't have ****ing clue OR Conclusion 3: Genetics, brain structure et al that one has with birth influences and direct towards some sort of sexuality, but we can't escape conclusion 1 entirely... Or Conclusion 4: we all reincarnate and make choice of our sexuality prebirth. Our souls then influence formation of our brain and activations of genes during pregnancy ...so yeah. Despite the theory of the weeks no one really has any idea. I'd say Conlusion 1/3 fits closest to truth.

my suggestion, actually. the UN is evil, btw, if there is a such thing as "evil." the UN caters to evil sorts such as xard: those that want to oppress and will go anywhere to get oppression forced on people if his country won't sign up for the oppression. at least, that's what xard told me in another thread. taks I thought we were debating about "immorality" of taxing before I left internet completely for couple of months. And with random_n00b it had something to do with morals overall. Resurrecting many months old topic would've been more than silly. What makes United Nations more evil than single nation? Why would UN legistilations be more immoral than those United States Of America forces on its states?

I'm encouraging myself to do encouraging things As well as getting seriously fed up with Lennon's Happy Xmas (War Is Over). And other Christmas songs.

oh and I listen a lot to same stuff. Because it's ****ing awesome Syd Barret - Here I Go

It's not as bad as the Arkansas Unmarried Couple Adoption Ban. It's only a proposition. You know, if you chaps signed up to an international human rights treaty you could avoid a lot of this by people appealing to the external court. We've been getting a lot of stuff like that through the EU. but UN is evil and hurt mah sovierintyyyy =(

Well, you've certainly managed to take the conversation somewhere..? I hope the top 20 and 50 thing was meant to be ironic. No, I'm dead serious. I'm quite... unorganized person over all, but I have this perverse thing for listing stuff. All time best movies, all time best singles, all time most influential artists, most idiotic thing I've seen this year etc. Well of course. But you're missing the point. Innovations (whether it be wah-wah pedal or subverting typical song structures) in that era were numerous and there's a lot things about which you could say "never heard anything like that before". Not so much today. When I dig something they stay on my whatever you want to call them lists. (If forced to name) there's two albums I always go back to and those are PF's Dark Side of the Moon and Wish You Were Here. In anime equivalents are Neon Genesis Evangelion, Cowboy Bebop and some other films e.g Grave of the fireflies. In literature... yeah, you get what I mean. That doesn't mean I'm not searching for new stuff either; in anime last new item that made me go "O_o" and has really good chances at ending up in that list was Haibane Renmei. well, I'll check out some of them when I'm done with my current era of focus, namely late 60's important albums (last I got was The Kinks's The Village Green Preservation Society, awesome stuff). I've also been checking out some Zappa albums but so far I've been far too scared to give listen to them. I'm not so sure. There were many important 70's acts in formation of electronic music and I'd say Kraftwerk and Brian Eno are pretty much equal in importance. Sielun Veljet - Peltirumpu

Well, I've been reading history of imperialism lately and British Empire actually was quite decent for gigantic empire. You guys did do a lot of good things too. French guys where the ****

"any other colonial power"? British were good guys in many aspects when compared to french, who could be complete ****. But I think Germany et al followed more british way than french way... who knows point taken

yeah, Gandhi sure did bad job