BruceVC

Another factor I'd say is highly important? Weather. Countless studies regarding suicide rates have shown suicide rates spike in the absence of sun. So Obama offers gay rights and weed while Putin offers babies and conservatively dressed women? " So Obama offers gay rights and weed while Putin offers babies and conservatively dressed women" That comment made me laugh because that's exactly the propaganda message its trying to convey

What is the difference between the two links, has it something to do with the website ? I have a moral objection against the website. You wouldn't buy chocolates from ISIS would you? Anyways, someone posted it somewhere else so NVM No I wouldn't buy chocolates from ISIS, you know me well Orog

What is the difference between the two links, has it something to do with the website ?

I agree with you, globally the press has gone to ****, but it gals me when people here hold up the Western press as the beacon of truth and objectivity. There is no such thing as a perfect international News Chanel that is completely 100 % objective all the time around all news stories But that doesn't mean the various news stories or editorials that we can see are all wrong, are aligned with governments or the stories they break can't be corroborated and proven true through multiple sources. So in other words most of the press does a good job at bringing us valid information rather than bringing us misinformation due to some surreptitious agenda So I'm sure what your point is, we know that there are some issues already with all news reporting. And this applies to Western and non-Western channels ?

http://money.cnn.com/2014/10/17/news/un-ebola-funding/index.html Wow, not a very good first effort from the world. The only country that gets a pass from being ashamed is the USA which is independently committing resources to the crisis I'm sure the donations will start coming in

Okay I see your point and its valid Let me ask you a different question, considering all the factors that constitute a government and how that effects the happiness of its citizens what would you say are factors outside of what the government influences that would make its citizens happy? And I know there are several but I'm interested in a scenario where you can say " country x is really happy and its got nothing to do with how the government is run "

Do you dispute the ability of the UN or any similar organisation to ever to be able to produce any kind of accurate reporting about trends and global statistics?

I made myself some Bolognese mince this weekend so I'm having that for lunch with spaghetti. Yummy Also the mince can be frozen nicely and kept for other meals

I don't know too much about these happiness lists, but I remember hearing that they did experiments seeing how people reacted to things like people injuring themselves or dropping their groceries, and if I remember correctly people in South America were more likely to actually go and help them compared to other places. This may be the experiment in question: http://www.fresnostate.edu/kremen/bonnercenter/documents/Kindness.pdf Jaded congrats, I see you guys are number 4. But that's probably because you guys are stoned all the time.....so wouldn't be happy under those circumstances right?

I would say that list is relatively consistent irrespective of who does the survey, do some searches around " happiest citizens in the world " and post the results? You may be right about South American countries but I don't recall them always being in these types of lists

And that's another contentious point for me in African context. Some people are so opposed to the West that they say " we should be looking at China for leadership because there economy is doing so well " My response is something along the lines of " China, really? In China you have a one party state and no trade unions, no real workers rights. In South Africa we give much recognition to workers right ( too much IMO as the trade unions hamper our economic growth but that's another debate ) and the fact we are a Democracy where the constitution governs our country and not even the government is above that, so if you think that somehow we could implement a system of government like the Chinese people are deluded " Because by following the Chinese system of government we might as well tear up our constitution

I respect this post immensely because in the past you have been understandably dismissive of some of Bioware games. But you also can see that Bioware is tying really hard to change that perception and DA:I will be the litmus test around if they have learnt lessons from the past

That's a good link you posted I like the part "And the new paradigm dominates and distorts the debate about Israel and the Palestinians. Israel comes across as the Western white guys, whilst the Arabs and Palestinians are the anti-colonial people of colour. It doesn’t matter what the details of any episode are: history tells us that one side are the ‘good guys’ and the forces of the future while the other side are the forces of the past which need to be swept away" I see this is in the South African context , any comparison to Western countries is immediately dismissed by some. For example sometimes on prominent talk shows debates like "Is Democracy right for Africa " are held. Some commentators say things like " The reason why Africa can't uplift itself is because we are following an un-African way of economic transformation ". So people raise strange questions like " does Democracy work ". I'll then phone in and make points like " yes of course Democracy works, look at the citizens of the happiest countries in the world. They are Western Democracies " This doesn't go down well because people are still thinking of Western countries in the Colonial narrative and can't accept the positive we can learn from the Europeans and Americans

Yes I suppose you right, its the usage of words like superior that is the problem But this is part of my point, is it wrong or politically incorrect to say Western countries have better governments than non-Western governments? If the benchmark is the quality of life and happiness factor then the facts speak for themselves? So why deny something that's true? And that doesn't mean Western governments are perfect

http://www.polygon.com/2014/10/17/6994921/hatred-the-polygon-interview Here is some further information from the developers of Hatred

They certainly aren't beneath examination, such things are fun to examine, and can grant some perspective, but they certainly shouldn't be treated as proof. So let me get this straight, if I ask 10 people in a room ( who all live in the UK ) " are you happy living in the UK " and 8 of those people say " yes " Its not proof or can be accepted that out of those 10 people, the majority of them are happy living in the UK?

You keep saying things like "these polls are meaningless" and somehow you think you can't you create a series of questions that cover a wide range of considerations that analyse happiness in a country? Despite the fact these are benchmarks that the UN uses. So I ask you again how would you measure the happiness of citizens of a particular country ? I also love the whole usage of the "no critical thinking " dismissal but yet you offer no viable alternative to this type of globally acceptable way of gathering statistics

Do you sit around trying to come up with most inane superficial bull**** that you can think of that matters to no one that can critically think before you post things like this? The subject matter may as well be 'People confirmed happier after eating Chocolate Ice Cream' or 'Being able to write your name in the snow in urine proves male virility' or 'Survey proves my High School is better than your High School.' Who care? No it doesn't. And I prefer mine dry not shaken so I'm better than you! And as usual you absolutely miss the point and refuse to see the facts , there is critical thinking that goes into these surveys. Its based on accurate and real metrics, I can't explain it any other way In your view how would you measure if the citizens of a country are happy because obviously the global and accepted way of doing it isn't relevant to you ?

Bruce, you can color it up and act all superior as much as you want, I'm not saying things one way or another about happyness, because it's impossible to know what other peoples percieve as certain levels of happyness, but all these surveys show is how happy the people living in the countries think they are in relation to other people, it could very well be that said people are the happiest people in the world, but these things don't prove it, stop pretending they're worthwhile. I can't decipher what you were trying to say in the second paragraph. You said ideology earlier, culture isn't really the same thing, but no, it doesn't. As I said with China, if it behaved like a western country instead of tyranical anti baby policiesthe population would explode, western style democracies are absolutely horrible at dealing with something that requires long and hard oppresion of the people to prevent even worse disaster. All styles of government, have their ups and downs, western democracies aren't inherently better, they're nice enough when there is no imminent danger though. You still seem to be misunderstanding something I'll explain it differently, the metrics that determine if someone is happy is not as simple as a person being asked on the street " are you happy living in your country " and then if the person says " yes " this is considered proof of happiness They look at a wide range of factors that include trust in your government economic opportunities ability of a particular government to deliver services perceptions of corruption gross domestic product per capita, life expectancy They don't ask people how do you feel compared to citizens of other countries, they ask "how do you feel about living in your own country. So there should be no debate about "what is the perception of happiness" because these surveys go into detail around a range of factors. Of course all countries have ups and downs, but that's not the point. I am saying it's clear from numerous surveys that Western countries offer there citizens the best quality of life so therefore they have the best systems of governments compared to other governments that exist in the modern world. And many of these other governments don't follow the ideological system of governing that Western countries do, which is a belief and implementation in the importance of what a Democracy stands for. .

There is absolutely nothing arrogant or random when these surveys get created. Also it is measured on a wide range of metrics that cover all aspects of life in those countries. If you don't agree with that I suggest you do some quick Google searches around " happiest countries in the world " and you will all the factors that get considered. Its very measurable But end of the day yes certain things effect happiness on different levels but its not hard to get consensus or accuracy when a questions is asked " are you happy living in your country" and this question is directly influenced by how the governments are seen to be running those countries So if Western countries have the happiest citizens then doesn't that mean Western culture is overall the best culture in the world?

You dismiss my point but you don't care to say why? How do you suggest that we measure what systems of governments in the world are the most effective and therefore need to be emulated? Lets not argue semantics, I gave you a list. Surly if the citizens of those countries are the happiest citizens in the world then the corollary of that must be that there governments are going a good job? And yes there is such a thing a Western ideology and it revolves around the principle of Democratic governments People seem to get uncomfortable when someone says " Western culture is the best in the world "...but what exactly is incorrect with this? If the measurement we use is the happiness of there citizens then the facts are irrefutable?

http://edition.cnn.com/2014/03/20/travel/happiest-countries-to-visit/index.html We have touched on this topic before and I have personally made the point that "Western culture is the superior culture to others " and this was criticised by some as hubris, inaccurate and being "out of touch with reality " But I think its a good time to revisit this discussion. When I say " Western ideology " is superior the fact is that this list confirms this as the top ten countries are all Western countries and they have the happiest citizens in the world I'm not saying that Western countries have necessarily the cleverest people or that there aren't faults. The point is that Western Democracies work. Despite there faults they give there citizens the best quality of life end of the day. So what's wrong with saying " Western ideology " offers the best system of government for its citizens and therefore are the best example of how countries should be run? If you disagree with the my point that Western countries have the happiest citizens, and therefore the best governments, then please produce your own list so we can discuss it I see the Scandinavian countries are again in the top 10 list, so once again the important consideration of there socialist hybrid model really seems to work. High employment rate, high taxes but very effective government institutions. Isn't this model something we all should be aspiring to?

https://za.news.yahoo.com/nigeria-says-reaches-deal-boko-haram-over-abducted-152326480.html So some good news, and its rare around these types of events in the African context It looks like Boko Haram is going to give the school girls back, I wonder what they are getting in return? Apparently they will get some of there captured leaders back?

Geez I honestly can't think of worse music than that death metal...imagine being stuck in a room and having to listen to it for hours and hours

There has been three mass shootings and one bombing of shopping center in past 12 years in Finland, in every of these cases except one (our newest one where perpetrator got angry in line to food kiosk and decided to get his guns and kill everybody) there has been threats from perpetrator that they will do these acts in internet beforehand and each case police deemed those threats to be nothing but empty talks in internet, so much so that in one case the even gave weapon buy permit to perpetrator for weapon that he use in his killing spree even though they knew that he had threaten to shoot his fellow students. Which is why I think that internet threats should be taken as seriously as those that are made to face to face. If we don't take threats in internet seriously they will work as mask that obscures us to see those threats from people that actually will commit acts they threat to do and changes our attitudes towards hostile language so that we don't even blink when people use crude and uncivil language when they speak to us, which just make our society so much less pleasant to live (but that maybe just me not everybody else). And for every one of those there is a million that amount to nothing. Statistically, you have a higher chance of being stuck by lighting while in a rubber suit between two metal buildings. Problem with taking everything seriously then it doesn't leave room for everything else. You talk about a pleasant society to live in? I for one don't consider police states pleasant. Should speeding not be a offence or thing that is treated seriously as there is every day billions of occurrences of speeding that don't lead accidents or road deaths and statistically those to happen compared to number of speedings is so marginal that people die more probably to meteoroid hit than it is to one occurrence speeding to cause accident. I have used BBS/internet as way to communicate nearly every day with people from beginning of 1990s and I have not received even single death threat against me or anybody close to me in all this time. So I don't necessary believe that number of death threats in internet is necessary in uncontrollable numbers as most of them focus on small set of people. Of course I could be privileged person who can't understand real scope of the problem. If we take every threat seriously there is high change that number of threats will drop, because people can't yell their threats without risk that there is consequences. If you think that state become police state when there are consequences when you threat to kill somebody, then we have different meanings for that word. Latest from twitter. Polygon has written editorial about gamergate, journalistic ethics, corruption of gaming media and gaming culture. http://www.polygon.com/2014/10/17/6996601/on-gamergate-a-letter-from-the-editor I also don't consider that a police state, it would be a very pleasant and reasonable place to live in actually