Wrath of Dagon Posted April 12, 2010 Posted April 12, 2010 http://news.yahoo.com/s/time/20100412/us_time/08599197896300 If that doesn't make your blood boil. "Moral indignation is a standard strategy for endowing the idiot with dignity." Marshall McLuhan
lord of flies Posted April 12, 2010 Posted April 12, 2010 Plutocratic ruling class of the United States maintains its power, American working class foots the bill. News at eleven.
I want teh kotor 3 Posted April 12, 2010 Posted April 12, 2010 That's odd, LoF. The way I understand things, the rich pay more taxes. In 7th grade, I teach the students how Chuck Norris took down the Roman Empire, so it is good that you are starting early on this curriculum. R.I.P. KOTOR 2003-2008 KILLED BY THOSE GREEDY MONEY-HOARDING ************* AND THEIR *****-*** MMOS
Enoch Posted April 12, 2010 Posted April 12, 2010 Wait... How many millions are in a brazilian? /oldjoke Anyhow, I agree wholly with the point that U.S. farm subsidies are enormously bad policy for a large number of reasons. I do wonder where the USTR and the Department of Agriculture is getting the money, though. Is "bribing Brazilian farmers to stop them from pursuing WTO sanctions" a permissible use of any of their current appropriations, or are they going to have to ask Congress for it specifically? It probably doesn't matter, though-- the over-representation of rural states in Congress has led to a ridiculous amount of agribusiness ass-kissing, so they probably won't be shy about adding a few million more.
Wrath of Dagon Posted April 12, 2010 Author Posted April 12, 2010 Yes, they can't be bothered to amend the old subsidy law before its expiration, but it's never too much bother to add a new subsidy, no matter who it's for. "Moral indignation is a standard strategy for endowing the idiot with dignity." Marshall McLuhan
Enoch Posted April 12, 2010 Posted April 12, 2010 By the way, it's not really the fact that the payments are to be made to Brazilians that bothers me. To me, a country influencing foreign relations via bribery is not any more or less objectionable than influencing foreign relations by the implicit threat of stockpiling things that can blow people up. Both have their place and should be used by any country trying to maximize its pull on world affairs. This is more a case of 1) disregarding one's treaty obligations by buying off the people who point out violations of agreed-to principals rather than by correcting these violations, and 2) a continuation of the monstrous pile of idiocy that is American agricultural policy. Also, what happens when some other cotton-exporting WTO member nation (China, India, Pakistan, Turkey, etc.) brings the same complaint about U.S. cotton subsidies before the WTO? The WTO decisionmaking would almost certainly be the same-- would the U.S. bribe those countries out of seeking retaliatory sanctions, too?
Hiro Protagonist Posted April 12, 2010 Posted April 12, 2010 (edited) 1.6 trillion and growing Trillion isn't that much. The U.S. has had that for a long time. I want to see Quadrillion but even then nothing will happen. Edited April 12, 2010 by Hiro Protagonist
Wrath of Dagon Posted April 13, 2010 Author Posted April 13, 2010 (edited) 1.6 trillion and growing Trillion isn't that much. The U.S. has had that for a long time. What universe are you from? By the way, it's not really the fact that the payments are to be made to Brazilians that bothers me. To me, a country influencing foreign relations via bribery is not any more or less objectionable than influencing foreign relations by the implicit threat of stockpiling things that can blow people up. Both have their place and should be used by any country trying to maximize its pull on world affairs. This is more a case of 1) disregarding one's treaty obligations by buying off the people who point out violations of agreed-to principals rather than by correcting these violations, and 2) a continuation of the monstrous pile of idiocy that is American agricultural policy. Also, what happens when some other cotton-exporting WTO member nation (China, India, Pakistan, Turkey, etc.) brings the same complaint about U.S. cotton subsidies before the WTO? The WTO decisionmaking would almost certainly be the same-- would the U.S. bribe those countries out of seeking retaliatory sanctions, too? Bribery might be OK if it benefitted the US in some way. But we're bribing people so we can screw ourselves over, that's got to be a new low. Edited April 13, 2010 by Wrath of Dagon "Moral indignation is a standard strategy for endowing the idiot with dignity." Marshall McLuhan
Walsingham Posted April 13, 2010 Posted April 13, 2010 By the way, it's not really the fact that the payments are to be made to Brazilians that bothers me. To me, a country influencing foreign relations via bribery is not any more or less objectionable than influencing foreign relations by the implicit threat of stockpiling things that can blow people up. Agreed. Don't tell me you've also forgotten how third order dynamics work, WoD? "It wasn't lies. It was just... bull****"." -Elwood Blues tarna's dead; processing... complete. Disappointed by Universe. RIP Hades/Sand/etc. Here's hoping your next alt has a harp.
Killian Kalthorne Posted April 13, 2010 Posted April 13, 2010 You know what would fix the world economy, though it may cause some strife in the beginning. A one world currency. Lets call it the Euroyen. Make the world one economic unit. From England to Japan, from the US to Argentina, just one currency. That way we can bribe nations with their own money. Hilarity ensues! "Your Job is not to die for your country, but set a man on fire, and take great comfort in the general hostility and unfairness of the universe."
Walsingham Posted April 13, 2010 Posted April 13, 2010 You know what would fix the world economy, though it may cause some strife in the beginning. A one world currency. Lets call it the Euroyen. Make the world one economic unit. From England to Japan, from the US to Argentina, just one currency. That way we can bribe nations with their own money. Hilarity ensues! Given the choice appears to be between mismanagement and hilarity I'm with you on choosing hilarity. "It wasn't lies. It was just... bull****"." -Elwood Blues tarna's dead; processing... complete. Disappointed by Universe. RIP Hades/Sand/etc. Here's hoping your next alt has a harp.
Killian Kalthorne Posted April 13, 2010 Posted April 13, 2010 Sometimes mismanagement can lead to hilarity, Walsh. Sometimes. "Your Job is not to die for your country, but set a man on fire, and take great comfort in the general hostility and unfairness of the universe."
Walsingham Posted April 13, 2010 Posted April 13, 2010 Sometimes mismanagement can lead to hilarity, Walsh. Sometimes. Let T = Tragedy D = Distance to tragedy from observer C = Comedy experienced by the observer T*D=C "It wasn't lies. It was just... bull****"." -Elwood Blues tarna's dead; processing... complete. Disappointed by Universe. RIP Hades/Sand/etc. Here's hoping your next alt has a harp.
Killian Kalthorne Posted April 13, 2010 Posted April 13, 2010 Right on the cake with that one, Walsh. Still, I do think that if we, as a species, are going to survive the next century or two we need to start solidifying ourselves as one species instead of separate nation states. "Your Job is not to die for your country, but set a man on fire, and take great comfort in the general hostility and unfairness of the universe."
Walsingham Posted April 13, 2010 Posted April 13, 2010 Right on the cake with that one, Walsh. Still, I do think that if we, as a species, are going to survive the next century or two we need to start solidifying ourselves as one species instead of separate nation states. I think we need to recognise we are one species far more often, but as far as administrative entities go, being one huge superstate strikes me as a really bad idea. In fact I'm sure you said the USA was too large, didn't you? "It wasn't lies. It was just... bull****"." -Elwood Blues tarna's dead; processing... complete. Disappointed by Universe. RIP Hades/Sand/etc. Here's hoping your next alt has a harp.
Killian Kalthorne Posted April 13, 2010 Posted April 13, 2010 True. Too many people with too many conflicting opinions ready to bring the smackdown on those who disagree with them. If we can get past that! Think of the potential! "Your Job is not to die for your country, but set a man on fire, and take great comfort in the general hostility and unfairness of the universe."
Gfted1 Posted April 13, 2010 Posted April 13, 2010 Trillion isn't that much. You may find this interesting, visualizing one TRILLION dollars. "I'm your biggest fan, Ill follow you until you love me, Papa"
Gorgon Posted April 13, 2010 Posted April 13, 2010 Agricultural policy has always been about protectionism as far as I can remember anyway. Well not always, the English were happy to let free market forces reign and let a million Irish and more Indians die of starvation. Na na na na na na ... greg358 from Darksouls 3 PVP is a CHEATER. That is all.
Wrath of Dagon Posted April 14, 2010 Author Posted April 14, 2010 By the way, it's not really the fact that the payments are to be made to Brazilians that bothers me. To me, a country influencing foreign relations via bribery is not any more or less objectionable than influencing foreign relations by the implicit threat of stockpiling things that can blow people up. Agreed. Don't tell me you've also forgotten how third order dynamics work, WoD? Huh? "Moral indignation is a standard strategy for endowing the idiot with dignity." Marshall McLuhan
Gorth Posted April 14, 2010 Posted April 14, 2010 Trillion isn't that much. You may find this interesting, visualizing one TRILLION dollars. Ah, you guys just need to have 11 weeks less vacation every year, problem solved. Where do I apply for the job as finance minister? “He who joyfully marches to music in rank and file has already earned my contempt. He has been given a large brain by mistake, since for him the spinal cord would surely suffice.” - Albert Einstein
Moose Posted April 14, 2010 Posted April 14, 2010 And just think, if everyone slave laboured for 2 and a half years there'd be no national debt. There are none that are right, only strong of opinion. There are none that are wrong, only ignorant of facts
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now