and china hates america but knows a good business relationship when it sees one
“it’s not personal. it’s just business.”
This all seems like nonsense. It was maybe 1000 years ago when it was smaller individual kingdoms and then they eventually merged and then more merging and shit happened. It seems like maybe in a 100 or so years from now, it’ll just be one global government or close to it, while having governors in each country like Alexander the Great’s Empire. Seems inevitable to me with all these advances in technology and transportation bridging the world closer to together.
Lol a UE would never work. Why? Because I’m pretty damn sure the US is the most hated country in the world. I personally don’t hate them, but I’m pretty sure the whole of the Middle East, China, Russia, North Korea and a lot of African countries hate the guts out of the US lol. I think many European countries would probably be up for it, the rest I very much doubt.
watching inside job, the shit they did to iceland is jacked up, don’t fix what ain’t broken.
Reminds me of the Boondocks episode where blacks got pissed off at Huey for saying “meh” in response to Obam’s election:lol:
of course it will happen. Im just not down with it. other countries have their ideas and ways of living. although there are some things i do like from the European model, and other countries. I fucking despise a lot of their policies. predominately their stance on the ability for a citizen to own and purchase a “gun.” So no, I don’t want another people’s poppy shit ideas that come from a whole diffrent culture influencing and dictating how i can live. Its bad enough that there is a lot of conlfict of intrest in this country. Now imagine it on a global scale?
id like to know how/why you think it’s the corporations fault for a lack of education?
im outi
Roberth
Everyone in Africa wants to kill everyone?
Not quite.
^And don’t African countries have growing ties with China?(In some cases, like Somalia, those ties go back quite a bit)
China gets their oil from Africa if I recall.
it was a joke.
In a couple different ways. When corporations drive down wages, the children of their workers suffer, and one way in which that happens is that the parents may discourage them from going to college because of the cost. Sure there are scholarships, but if you’re any less than an A-/B+ or student those can be hard to get.
Also, a lot of corporations donate to schools and general infrastructure as a PR move. But if they don’t get their way in terms of tax breaks or market advantages, they pull these donations and then prices go up which only hurts those at the bottom of the food chain.
Actually scholarships and atheltics are mostly to blame for the cost of education going through the roof, along with loans. This is widely considered a bubble that is going to burst. The education is not worth what people are paying for it, but all the various scholarships and loans make it sure that someone is going to pay for it so they keep raising the rates, and a ton of their costs are devoted to sports.
you know, people often say the system is flawed. Well is it really flawed? The system is the evolution of the state of mind of the people, and executed because the people want it. Perhaps, its not the system to blame, but the people themselves to blame.
Take drug laws for example.
are they flawed? You could say very, they are very flawed and to black and white. But why is that?
The answer is quite simple. The system that is developed has to assume that the people who run into these laws aren’t very honest, that is, the people would lie and cheat to continuously get away with it. So to avoid this problem, the system has to be very cut and dry to ensure the law is carried out. yes they are unfortunate anomalies, and there are cases where people are powerless to do much because the law, or policy, is very cut and dry. there are lee ways and second chances, but its very hard to get a second chance because if anybody could get a second chance then people would abuse that.
Police brutality? The same could be said, its not the system, its the people. The police has to assume the worst at any given time.
What about ludicrous legal battles where prosecutors are being relentless even though there is no physical evidence to link said person? Especially in supposed rape or abuse cases where the defendant may be innocent and the women is just being a psycho bitch about it?
So the issue is not how do we fix the system, but how do we fix the people. So that when there is an anomaly, the worst does not have to be assumed, and the defendant time and resources are not wasted with these sort of issues?
You can change the system all you want, its still going to be a piece of shit, because the system has to evolve in a way where it has to assume the worst out of everybody.
Well, ideas?
Destroy Humanity.
Wake me when shit turns violent. Then I’ll have something to contribute.
Nice little read I came across: http://www.zerohedge.com/news/guest-post-what-country-needs-now-hope
you act as though “the people” is one cohesive group of individuals. Look at situations like the Iraq War. Did “the people” have any say in this? No. Half the country didn’t want to go to war, and yet off they went. Do you think average people have ANY say in the laws that get passed (look at current copyright laws and patent trolling), or how their tax money gets spent?
The major problem is that everyday people have on function in the shaping of their country. They get to vote in who will suck up to corporations and ignore their voice. Other than that, all they get to do is work, pay taxes, and die.
I just learned that flouride in the water isn’t good for you. Sorry if I’m late lol
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_0PAxf7fj_k
Turns out that the scientist who said it was safe also conducted secret experiments with lead and plutonium on people, but it was kept hidden. And another doctor who was the first to warn of penecillin allergies, and the negative effects of carcinogens in cigarette smoke, also warned about the harmful side effects of flouride.
After watching the above vid I thought about it, and it makes sense. You don’t drink toothpaste rinse water, so why drink flouride? Basically the industry just gets rid of their flouride waste in tap water, as opposed to disposing of it in other ways.
And if anyone thinks that it’s just people being paranoid, don’t forget that lead in gas was dangerous, and asbestos was promoted until it was proved that it is really harmful.
People have a natural psychological tendency to abuse power when they have it. And when I say people, I do mean all people. Some people have a greater tendency than others to seek power. Any long-term solution to our current problems must involve a society in which those people are not rewarded, in which there is no means or incentive for the few to achieve power over the many.
I realize that sounds very radical and pie-in-the-sky utopian, but if you insist on half-assed solutions, you’re going to get half-assed results.
Safety is determined by dosage, and fluoridated water is legally required to be kept well within hard limits of safety. The tradeoff is a significant increase in the overall dental health of the public.
Individual scientists can be right in some findings and wrong in others. What matters is independent confirmation within the scientific community.
There’s your problem.
Those things were proven dangerous through the discovery of hard evidence, not speculation and YouTube videos.