BruceVC

I tend to agree with both you and Skarpen in different ways I do think you guys are using extreme examples around what can be classified as freedom, its unlikely that the quality of life and hardships with someone unemployed and homeless can be equated to " freedom " as most of us would define it But you definitely dont need to own property and own " capital goods " (still unclear what you mean ) , have money and or resources to have a sense of freedom. For example you could be renting a place and have a low income job but live in a country where you feel safe and quality of life is excellent ...what about those fortunate people who are in happy and loving relationships or just have great support structures through family or friends ? They may have none of things you seem to define as aspects of Capitalism but I guarantee you they can be both happy and have a sense of freedom I realize I dont have much personal experience with this type of lifestyle but I do try to understand how to make SA a better place because of the deprivations of Apartheid legacy and general high levels of inequality I see. So I do contribute towards a better SA where reasonable and applicable. Anyway I have met people who have no money and no resources and sometimes they arent even employed but work for NGO.....many of these people are still positive and do believe in freedom because they can vote in a Democracy and are included in other components that come with a Democracy So its leads back to my original point how " freedom " really means different things to different people and we should try not to necessarily define this word too critically based on materialist things

Its on Netflix, why cant you watch it there?

I really am feeling the benefit of getting back to gym, I started going back to gym about 3 months ago and I stopped going actively for about 2-3 years before that Anyway Im now doing 50 minutes of cardio 4-6 times a week and especially on the treadmill I can feel how much fitter I am. I have gone back to gym with an approach as it being a lifestyle choice which means I wont stop again and become lazy

I read your links but they are both unconvincing as examples of the failure of Capitalism or even how these are relevant to your initial suggestion about privatization of land is wrong or what you mean by the ownership of capital goods ....not sure what this means in any recognized, modern economic lexicon? For example women being forced into sex work for food is terrible and I wish it didnt occur. But we have discussed in the past the reality of the reasons of austerity for the PIGS countries and what this meant for people on the ground in these countries who indeed suffer in different ways. In summary austerity was and is necessary because of a failure of economic management and a failure to adhere to global financial regulations ...dont blame Capitalism for bad leadership decisions or a failure to implement prudent financial management that the majority of countries in the EU have been able to do The link about private companies owning water resources is a very serious risk and should only be allowed under certain specific conditions. But most countries dont allow this and the government controls water resources which is a basic human right ....access to water. Also even if a private company somehow controlled water resources and then started denying water to citizens of that country this would never be allowed as the government should act in the interests of human rights and there own citizens. Even if the government was taken to some international court by the company Im confident the corporation would lose the court case in the interests of human rights and how denying water could lead to lose of life So Im unclear on what those links have got to do with your suggested changes to the free market and Capitalist system?

On the issue of legitimate and sustainable regime change let me give you some background and context to why this can be justified and then pose a question to you Firstly let me say my opinion has changed on this. Before Iraq 2003 I use to believe Democracy, the free market, responsible Capitalism and the institutions that make it work have been historically and currently proven to be the most effective and sustainable systems of government and economies in the world that offer citizens overall the best quality of life. I still believe that but where I have changed is you cant force countries to adopt a better system because sometimes the attempt to help is rejected or seen in a negative light by the country we are trying to help Which is why I use the words " sustainable regime change " Now what would be an example of this and how would you justify it? There are several examples of this but my fundamental definition where this would be acceptable is where you have a failed state and that failed state is not due to the country being very poor or having a legitimate Democracy that made bad decisions. This type of government needs to be assisted and regime change here would be wrong and pointless I am talking about governments that are either dictatorships or represent " Democratic facades " , this means where a government stays in power by undermining and cheating in the Democratic process...so they say they are a legitimate government but obviously if people haven't been able to vote or participate in the Democratic process equally and fairly then its illegitimate The outcome of this type of government is normally a collapse of basic services, economic opportunities, quality of life, lack of investment and sustainable futures for citizens and there families. Now where I have also changed about this appalling type of leadership is where now I think " as long as my country isn't impacted by this flawed government we shouldn't get involved "....but here is real issue. It is very possible you will be effected especially where you share a border so a brutal dictatorships can become your problem even if you dont want to get involved In South Africa we have become the destination of millions of immigrants who come to SA looking for jobs and some kind of prosperity because these dont exist in there own countries, quite simply we cannot absorb all these people who enter the country illegally and are undocumented. We just dont have resources For example Zimbabwe from 2002 was allowed to get worse and worse and Mugabe systematically destroyed his countries economy through egregious political and economic decisions. The outcome was the mass illegal immigration of millions of Zimbabweans to other countries who now have to try to deal with them. Regime change should have been implemented in Zim in about 2005 by putting real pressure on Mugabe by the African Union but by keeping silent the situation deteriorated and countries like South Africa now have to internally deal with the pressure on our economy Finally this could apply to the USA and does in some real similarities . The mass movement of immigrants from Central America to the USA border is due to high levels of crime and the reality that there countries dont offer economic futures. Now I am not suggesting countries like Honduras and El Salvador become legitimate targets for regime change because they dont fit my profile of dictatorships but there are other examples where the failed outcomes of governments leads to a direct negative impact to the USA So going back to your original post, if the actions and decisions of a particular foreign government due to failed leadership can directly and indirectly impact the USA dont you think sustainable regime change should and can be justified?

Tonight Im chlling at home, I cooked an ostrich steak last night and there were leftovers as there always are with a large piece of meat so for dinner Im having ostrich steak rolls which include Prego sauce Sauteed onions Thinly sliced ostrich Cheese Simple but delicious

Its similar to " alternative facts " right skarpen

GD dont you think this word freedom is used selectively and means different things to different people ? For example I believe in freedom but the rule of law and order needs to be maintained and also I dont believe in the freedom that dictators assume they have in illegitimate governments where there was no real Democratic process to elect them hence making them valid targets of sustainable regime change

Nice, good times await in the culinary world of barbecuing for you

" Trump on the podium at the Nuremberg Rally in 1933 " ....excellent analogy Gorthfuscious, I can also imagine Trump loving that type of event

Nice, we expecting some new, cool meal recipes and in the Food Thread Can you post a photo of your grill so I can see what it looks like, in SA people dont generally use grills but use a Weber for braais\barbecues and they look like the photos below . I admire the way you have these elaborate grills in the USA https://www.amazon.com/Weber-14402001-Original-Premium-Charcoal/dp/B00N65ADP8/ref=asc_df_B00N65ADP8/?tag=bingshoppinga-20&linkCode=df0&hvadid={creative}&hvpos={adposition}&hvnetw=o&hvrand={random}&hvpone=&hvptwo=&hvqmt=e&hvdev=c&hvdvcmdl={devicemodel}&hvlocint=&hvlocphy=&hvtargid=pla-4583932699077443&psc=1

This has been raised several times by political analysts and its an interesting question, why indeed does Trump embarrassingly and disconcerting seem to publicly endorse and have such nice things to say about many dictators and strongmen around the world? There are several theories, I think its primarily because he literally admires the concept and thought of leaders who are not accountable and answerable to citizens and Democratic institutions like the media and independent courts. He feels he would be a more effective leader without political transparency and also that there are groups of people in modern Democracies who " conspire " against him like the " evil, fake news media" But I also consider most dictators as dysfunctional sociopaths and the countries they govern are overall much worse places to live in than the USA so Trump is delusional and confused about his admiration for strongmen because the things he likes about there policies would ultimately lead to the collapse of the USA and degrading of overall quality of life for all Americans...including Trump. " In the land of the blind the one -eyed man is king " https://edition.cnn.com/2017/05/16/world/trump-strongmen-erdogan-visit/index.html

Yeah, I also noticed this today..Im very excited

You right and this is often overlooked, fireworks can distress human beings due to a myriad of reasons and on a number of levels and is another justification to limit there usage

This is a common issue we see in SA and often hotly debated. We always use to make use of fireworks at Guy Fawkes but from about 15 years the general sentiment has changed because of the real harm and distress it causes to animals. Personally no one I know uses fireworks anymore but its still allowed on certain celebrations like Diwali which is a Hindu religious celebration but even then using fireworks is vastly reduced. I dont see any contradiction with changing your view on this as that's one of the reasons we grow as a society...we learn how to be better and adopt new views if they are constructive and positive. You should call the police and report the usage of illegal fireworks because its the law and the right thing to do Here is a good article that explains why fireworks are so harmful to dogs and other animals https://citizen.co.za/news/south-africa/1777150/fireworks-the-unnecessary-implications-of-celebrations/

Good point Gorthfuscious, when the southern border is brutally and inexorably attacked by the immigrant families....unleash the tanks !!!!

As usual you have provided a very comprehension answer that makes sense based on facts and historical precedent, I now understand several core criticisms that I heard This is about Trump hubris and the adding of tanks and other military paraphernalia is both unnecessary and misplaced

I watch adult movies sometimes but not because I want to...I do it because Im a nice person and I want to support the porn stars in there jobs. If people like me didnt support there movies they wouldnt have jobs and I dont want people to lose there jobs especially in this difficult climate where retrenchments and job losses occur...so I do as much as I can in my own small way Im all about the hugz and feelz

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2019/07/01/president-donald-trump-get-tanks-july-4-celebration-dc/1621331001/ Trumps getting lambasted for arranging tanks and planes for the 4th July , I like military parades and I like tanks so Im not sure I understand this criticism

Volo...the only reason you like Kristin Stewart as an actress is because she is hoooooot Thats wrong volo , you mustn't objectify women, thats naziish approach ...you must judge people on there merit and not there looks

It is brilliant, haunting and moving. Great series I am watching Tell Me a Story, very entertaining psychological series about the stories of different people and how certain events have parallels to fairy tales but its set in modern day New York https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tell_Me_a_Story_(TV_series)

You cant enforce an undemocratic system on an established historic Democracy, its going to get huge push back because people prefer Democracy and things like a fair and transparent judicial system, human rights and freedom to criticize your government China doesnt believe and allow these things and is slowly trying to change HK to there ways..its never going to be accepted

https://www.independent.ie/world-news/hong-kong-protesters-take-over-legislative-chamber-on-handover-anniversary-38270002.html HK heating up again as protesters have taken over the legislative building in the city...China is going to battle to control this city in there normal undemocratic way

On a tangent not related to the doings of the Cristian churches here, how would you, generic you, not Hurlshot you, measure most persecuted anyway? Number of individuals? Degree of persecution (i.e. being fed to lions or just not being allowed to stone women who get raped or by duration? In which case the Jews probably wins). Most persecution of Christians these days is done by other Christian denominations. Notable exceptions being places like Indonesia, Malaysia, Egypt and Nigeria where the persecution is done by Muslims. Gorthfuscious why you trying to destroy Christianity? Empires have attempted that and it has failed ....look at the Vikings and the Romans, eventually they converted Its easy to sometimes misunderstand where someones post was directed towards, so Hurlshot was making the point towards sharp but you raised an interesting broader question about religious prosecution in the modern world ...how do we define it and where the issues lies? I dont want to look at this historically because of the complexity and numerous factors....for example some religions and or ethic groups in ancient times were effectively obliterated based primarily on there religious beliefs. We could argue historically they were the most prosecuted, like the Babylonians. So lets discuss this in the last 30 years or so as we have the most information and active data both anecdotal and easily accessible It is relevant as you mentioned to define " persecution " in the context of religious persecution. I would break it into " hard " and " soft " persecution to answer that So " hard " persecution would for example be killings, new laws being interacted specifically targeting the religion , denying someone access to courts and or someone not being able to practice there religion meaningfully in any country because they represent a certain religious group Christians nowadays are subjected to this in some places like targeted attacks from ISIS throughout the ME, violence in Africa where groups like Boko Haram and Al-Shabaab attempt to single out Christians only and generally end up killing all innocents in there typical appalling logic and the reality of being able to be Christian and how to practice it in parts of India and or China But Muslims surely face the most hard persecution and there are many examples of this like Myanmar, huge targeting of Chinese Muslims by the Chinese government and then the killing of Muslims by ISIS in the ME. However it is also self-inflicted meaning Muslims and most deaths are caused within the Muslim community....like the Shia/Sunni conflict and the violence we see through the outcomes of the Arab Spring. This is Muslims killing Muslims " Soft " persecution I define as where nowadays we see attempts to undermine or legally change religious values or religious culture that has always existed in a particular country. And ironically this seems to be more common in " Western " Christian countries which have the greatest freedoms, I think it is wrong and divisive So trying to stop people celebrating or openly supporting Xmas in countries where most people are Christian is wrong ( they even celebrate Xmas in parts of the UAE), stopping schools from singing Christian hymns in a predominantly Christian school seems misplaced and illogical ....you cant force someone to sing but you shouldn't stop people who want to. And then when people want to criticize how intolerant religion is they generally bring up examples of certain Christian churches...as if Christianity is the problem compared to all religions when in fact I can give many other examples of how intolerant other religions are throughout the world. So it creates this view its easy to criticize Christianity because Christians will just accept it in the interests of freedom of speech. And I am not suggesting we shouldnt raise valid issues with religion and that religions shouldnt be progressive in certain ways but the narrative should be balanced and not target one group Interesting topic to debate, I look forward to your comments and other peoples views

I call those statistics nonsense and lacking in real analysis on outcomes, DUI checkpoints really work and are both a deterrent and a way to enforce the law I live in a country where we see real carnage on the roads and drunk driving is a major contributor towards this. I speak directly from my own experience and many people I know, about 10 years ago it was normal to drink and drive...not inebriated but still over the limit. We dont do that anymore and now use Uber to go to social functions or stay over at friends houses if we drinking Roadblocks are the main reason for this as they have been implemented in many places strictly and also we want to be better citizens So the guy protesting the DUI roadblock is just wasting everyone's time with some pointless and counter productive social justice experiment when the real question he should be asking is " is this a deterrent to drunk driving " and it is