Announcement

Collapse

Welcome to Moorcock's Miscellany

Dear reader,

Many people have given their valuable time to create a website for the pleasure of posing questions to Michael Moorcock, meeting people from around the world, and mining the site for information. Please follow one of the links above to learn more about the site.

Thank you,
Reinart der Fuchs
See more
See less

Changing the rhetoric

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • I’m not opposed to the Iraq war, but from the beginning I knew that things would not go well. Mainly this was because I know a thing or two about the culture from some of my dealings with Islamic people. Due to stuff in the Quran an Islamic person shouldn’t really make friends with or be around a non-Islamic person. Also, there is detailed information about what to do with non-Islamic neighbors. In other words, at best, non-Islamic people are supposed to be ejected as fast as possible to avoid mental contamination. Basically, the book says that god offered the Quran to all people and they rejected it. Of course, only the people in the mid-east were morally sound enough to accept the teachings. This means that all other people in the world are a kind of moral degenerate. So, I can’t understand how the Bush Admin could have underestimated the effect that the Islamic belief system would have on the war effort.

    In psychology there is something called a Planning Error that describes the human tendency to underestimate the complexity of a task. It seems to me that the trickle down and the Iraq war are examples of this phenomenon. Its not just republicans that do this but it is two major hits for them.


    Corporate stuff.
    In a capitalist country it makes sense that big business would want to give money to it’s representatives. It’s kind of like bidding on a contract only in reverse. If competition rather than fairness is the key element of our society then one should not complain. It’s a live by the sword die by the sword kind of thing. Sartre once said that how you live is how you would have the world live. So, competitive people really shouldn’t mind that others out compete them, because it is most likely what you would do if you could. However, if you are a democrat in the true sense of the word ,then our system could easily be viewed as an oligarchy. I think that this split is a major cause of friction in the US mind-set.

    If the KKK wanted to send me a $10,000 a month check that would be OK with me. However, if they expected me to do any for them that would be a different story. I get annoyed if I actually hear that a politician has become a de facto employee of some lobby. If special interest wants to give them money that’s fine; it’s like the industry wants to send a wake-up call to the person it power. If the politician chooses to listen then that’s the way it goes. However, if the person chooses to prostitute themselves then the politician is not really a representative any longer. That’s what I don’t like.

    Comment


    • Carter Kaplan,
      Don't forget the massive investment in porn as well. Thankfully, this is turning around a bit, but I suspect only after some shameful publicity.
      I guess that all of the cute trailer park girls lining up for their big pay checks from All Holes Filled No. 48 can thank big business for a chapter in their lives that they will never forget!

      By the way, the stock market is a form of gambling itself, and just like in a casino the high roller has a little more on his side than the weekend hustler.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by TheAdlerian
        If the KKK wanted to send me a $10,000 a month check that would be OK with me. However, if they expected me to do any for them that would be a different story. I get annoyed if I actually hear that a politician has become a de facto employee of some lobby. If special interest wants to give them money that’s fine; it’s like the industry wants to send a wake-up call to the person it power. If the politician chooses to listen then that’s the way it goes. However, if the person chooses to prostitute themselves then the politician is not really a representative any longer. That’s what I don’t like.
        I gotta disagree here. Dirty money is dirty money, regardless of whether you act on the wishes of the benefactor. I would argue that if a politician is given money from a lobby he does not support, he should refuse the money on principle.

        Now, I realize that in the world of politics -- where money is just about everything -- this is not a practical way to win. But then, I've never contended that politicians were either practical or moral.
        "Wounds are all I'm made of. Did I hear you say that this is victory?"
        --Michael Moorcock, Veteran of the Psychic Wars

        Comment


        • PsychicWarVeteran,

          Now, I realize that in the world of politics -- where money is just about everything -- this is not a practical way to win. But then, I've never contended that politicians were either practical or moral.

          This was a part of the subtext of my statement. So, I do agree with you. Really, I don’t know how I would react to the KKK money. Knowing me, I would probably funnel it right into some opposing cause. Right after I paid the rent of course.

          Upon reflection, it must be difficult at times to know what the agenda of contributors are. For instance, I am opposed to gun control. If you think about my posts I tend to have a world view that is a bit cynical regarding the judgment and abilities of humanity. So, much like the founding fathers, I see a day when citizens may have to be armed against some crazy government. Maybe this will be 200 years from now how knows? So, is NRA money evil, or will one day in the future it be seen as a benevolent organization that did not give in to trendy social pressures. The scope of all this stuff is mind bending.

          I remember the Clinton/Gore problem with the Buddhist temple money. Who could be sweeter than Buddhist monks?

          However, I wish the national campaign fund would have been established . That would have made things a lot more fair, but then again that’s a bit of an anti-capitalist statement.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Bill
            As for the contribution numbers: BOLLOCKS. The source? "BoycottBush" site. No bias there. Let's go here: http://www.opensecrets.org/overview/...asp?cycle=2004 for an unbiased look. It should surprise anyone with an open mind that a) the numbers don't match with the anti-Bush site (possibly due to timing; the second source is for "2004", and the anti-Bush site is dated 2003, but b) more importantly, that THESE EVIL DISGUSTING CORPORATIONS ARE SPLITTING THEIR CONTRIBUTIONS. Is Microsoft somehow more pure or less interested in special interests for giving more money to the Dems?? How about Time Warner? So much for busting the liberal media bias myth. THEY GAVE 77% OF THEIR DONATIONS TO THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY. VIACOM GAVE 79% TO THE DEMS!!!!!!!!
            Oops! My mistake. USA is doing fine. ;)

            It's good to know that special interests are being distrubuted between both parties. My mistake. Everything is right and proper here.
            AMERICA IS #1!!! :lol:

            [broken link]

            If you want a conservative's viewpoint that agrees with how politicians' are destroying USA economically with their reckless spending, check out what Joe Scarborough has to say. He considers himself a conservative, and a moderate republican. He wrote a book on the stuff.

            [broken link]

            Rome Wasn't Burnt In A Day
            The Real Deal on How Politicians, Bureaucrats, and Other Washington Barbarians Are Bankrupting America


            excerpt from a book review...

            "Despite Scarborough's best attempts to brake the congressional spending train, he laments that the next few years were a blur of pork-barrel spending and big-government increases - even under a Republican President. Equipped with "ugly facts" about agency-funding increases since the GOP congressional takeover, Scarborough delivers a stinging indictment of his former colleagues: "Calling Republican leaders merely hypocritical on the issue of spending somehow falls short of the mark when confronted with these numbers." He cites particular examples of Republicans' shameless spending to drive home his point, from their padding of the 9/11 emergency spending bill with pet projects for their districts, to their willingness to "shortchange U.S. troops in Iraq" by stuffing pork into appropriations bills.

            For a further dose of reality, Scarborough ventures into the topic, "Why Washington Always Wins." No matter how naأ¯ve and principled young politicians may be when they arrive in Washington, they quickly are confronted with "the awesome might of Washington's political machine." This machine hardens hearts, Scarborough says, by either breaking idealists' spirits or by keeping them out of influential places. It is a system "beholden to corporate America" and special interest lobbies, and one dependent on "backroom bargains" between lawmakers. Conservative mavericks just don't survive."

            See. It's another Washington insider telling his truth. He's a conservative. He's a republican.
            Last edited by Rothgo; 04-09-2010, 03:51 AM.
            \"Bush\'s army of barmy bigots is the worst thing that\'s happened to the US in some years...\"
            Michael Moorcock - 3am Magazine Interview

            Comment


            • Think about the kids, man
              The KIDS!
              Their future!
              \"Bush\'s army of barmy bigots is the worst thing that\'s happened to the US in some years...\"
              Michael Moorcock - 3am Magazine Interview

              Comment


              • "As I've stated before, Washington Mutual recently sent their entire call center to India. They do not do business in India."

                They own no property in India? No investments in India? No financing of corporations (and thus a secured interest) doing business in India? No investors FROM India? No currency transactions involving Indian currency?

                I'm willing to accept your point, but am skeptical.

                Comment


                • It is supposed to be about the children, Jer. Unfortunately, "no child left behind" now refers only to their share of the national debt.

                  Comment


                  • "Oops! My mistake. USA is doing fine.

                    It's good to know that special interests are being distrubuted between both parties. My mistake. Everything is right and proper here.
                    AMERICA IS #1!!! "

                    But that's not what you said the first time. You made a correlation between corporate America, Special Interests, and the Republican party. I am not suggesting that this type of funding is right or wrong, but I wanted to point out that you didn't have to take a cheap - and as it turns out, factually incorrect - swipe at the Republican party to do it.

                    Why didn't you use the Democratic party as your example if you intended the broader point?

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Bill
                      "Oops! My mistake. USA is doing fine.

                      It's good to know that special interests are being distrubuted between both parties. My mistake. Everything is right and proper here.
                      AMERICA IS #1!!! "

                      But that's not what you said the first time. You made a correlation between corporate America, Special Interests, and the Republican party. I am not suggesting that this type of funding is right or wrong, but I wanted to point out that you didn't have to take a cheap - and as it turns out, factually incorrect - swipe at the Republican party to do it.

                      Why didn't you use the Democratic party as your example if you intended the broader point?
                      I was being sarcastic. I don't think America is #1, I think America is messed up in a lot of ways. I'm lucky to be born here and not in Iraq or Gaza, but that doesn't mean what's messed up with our political system is ok.
                      did you check out the Joe Scarborough info I added to that post?
                      I like him now. He's certainly no Bill O'Reilly.
                      Yes. I could talk about what's wrong with the Dems, but I am supporting the Dems right now.
                      Everyone here knows I want Bush to lose!
                      Even if it means electing a Yale alumnus multi-millionaire elitist like Kerry because I don't think anyone can do a worse job than Bush or be more deceptive and misleading as Bush.
                      \"Bush\'s army of barmy bigots is the worst thing that\'s happened to the US in some years...\"
                      Michael Moorcock - 3am Magazine Interview

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Bill
                        "As I've stated before, Washington Mutual recently sent their entire call center to India. They do not do business in India."

                        They own no property in India? No investments in India? No financing of corporations (and thus a secured interest) doing business in India? No investors FROM India? No currency transactions involving Indian currency?

                        I'm willing to accept your point, but am skeptical.
                        You are SO missing my point. Let me try to reiterate it.

                        I have no problem with companies having businesses in other countires and employing indigenous people as long as the people are doing work directly related to that company's direct position in their country. That is to say if Heinz sells ketchup in India, then let Indian people make the ketchup. Sending a customer service call center (that serves solely US customers) to India and justifying it by saying you have investors there is, in my opinion, apples and oranges.

                        But I know I'll never convince you of this. You think it's cool to send jobs overseas, fine. Yet another place we disagree. That's all it is. I have no more desire to defend this one. I'd only be repeating myself.
                        "Wounds are all I'm made of. Did I hear you say that this is victory?"
                        --Michael Moorcock, Veteran of the Psychic Wars

                        Comment


                        • "I was being sarcastic." No I got that; I took your sarcasm to mean you were making a general comment on America and not digging at the Republicans. But your followup post made it clear you were not making a general comment but WERE digging at the Republicans.

                          :D

                          Comment


                          • "Sending a customer service call center (that serves solely US customers) to India and justifying it by saying you have investors there is, in my opinion, apples and oranges."

                            Look, man, don't get so worked up. This is an important issue, and better minds than us have not figured it out. I am not poking you with a stick (which it sounds like you think I am), I am trying to understand the position.

                            Isn't that what a bank does? Banks aren't about savings accounts. Banks are about the transfers of capital. If a bank has investors in India, that IS it's business.

                            And by the way, I would respectfully ask that you rethink that position, becuase if every American company was to reallocate its work force to align its people with where it does business, (that is, make the ketchup in the country it sells the ketchup) the net result would be an EXTREME outflow of jobs. For example, GE does 55% to 60% of its business OVERSEAS, but has about 55% of its personnel in the U.S. If we were to limit our outsourcing of workers in that way, why wouldn't other countries then demand that we move US workers making ketchup for India over to India? What's good for the goose, no?

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Bill
                              Isn't that what a bank does? Banks aren't about savings accounts. Banks are about the transfers of capital. If a bank has investors in India, that IS it's business.
                              You're still missing it, Bill. Okay, let's say WAMU has investors that live in India. Tell me how sending a call center over to India whose sole responsibility it is to help American bank customers (not big investors) is justified.

                              Originally posted by Bill
                              And by the way, I would respectfully ask that you rethink that position, becuase if every American company was to reallocate its work force to align its people with where it does business, (that is, make the ketchup in the country it sells the ketchup) the net result would be an EXTREME outflow of jobs.
                              I didn't say I wanted this to happen -- of course I want the jobs to stay here, even Heinz -- I said I can't fault a company for hiring indigenous people to manufacture what is sold in their country. I'm trying to be moderate and not to go unrealistically too far to one side or another.

                              Tell me, what is your opinion of outsourcing jobs? I'm afraid I can't tell. Are you for it or against it?

                              Originally posted by Bill
                              But your followup post made it clear you were not making a general comment but WERE digging at the Republicans.
                              When doesn't Jerico dig at the Republicans? :lol:
                              "Wounds are all I'm made of. Did I hear you say that this is victory?"
                              --Michael Moorcock, Veteran of the Psychic Wars

                              Comment


                              • I mentioned in a previous post that in Philly an MSN certificate could get you a job starting at 75K; this was back in 1998. I knew a guy that just got out of four year who got one. He originally wanted to be a D&A counselor, they make between 25-34 in the area, but instead he went for the MSN thing and got the 75K. Personally, I love computers and have been using them since I was a little kid. To my knowledge he was not doing anything that amazing. I believe that he was giving support advice on the phone. So, I was just amazed.

                                I am the last person to be in the evil capitalist category, but if I owned a business in the computer field I might be looking for a way to devalue such a person’s salary. Oversees jobs are used for that strategy more than not.

                                Also, regarding the economic downturn after 911, I heard some analyst saying that it was a natural adjustment that people where loosing their jobs and savings because too many had gotten rich too fast. This stuck with me because it almost sounds like a conspiracy.

                                Additionally, I suppose as an employer it must be quite galling to have applicants say that they won’t do it for less than 80K! Well I know an Indian that will do it for 25K! Ha Ha!

                                Not to get back on the whole anti-capitalist thing but it makes me wonder where its headed. What will America be doing 100 or 200 years from now? Sounds like a good book...oh yeah he’s gone...oh well.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X