(Link to AcmlmWiki) Offline: thank ||bass
Register | Login
Views: 13,040,846
Main | Memberlist | Active users | Calendar | Chat | Online users
Ranks | FAQ | ACS | Stats | Color Chart | Search | Photo album
04-24-23 01:43 AM
Acmlm's Board - I3 Archive - - Posts by Arwon
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32
User Post
Arwon

Bazu


 





Since: 11-18-05
From: Randwick, Sydney, NSW, Australia

Last post: 5909 days
Last view: 5909 days
Posted on 07-19-06 11:55 PM, in Attention: The US Government Link
Fear?

I just wanted to point out that political violence is an effective circuit-breaker. not advocating it, mind you, just pointing out that it shakes things up.
Arwon

Bazu


 





Since: 11-18-05
From: Randwick, Sydney, NSW, Australia

Last post: 5909 days
Last view: 5909 days
Posted on 07-22-06 02:05 AM, in The Human Need For Hatred Link
I'm a bit unclear here, wite. Are you arguing that statutory rapists being treated like other sex offenders is right, or just?

I don't think statutory rape should be treated the same way as other sex crimes at all. Make it a different category, keep them off the "sex offender" lists, and so forth. Certainly don't give them the whole pariah-leper treatment. I'd even go so far as to say "yes, even if one person is much older". Sure, it's icky, but if a 16 year old chooses to fuck a 30 year old then that's categorically not the same as sexual assault or rape.
Arwon

Bazu


 





Since: 11-18-05
From: Randwick, Sydney, NSW, Australia

Last post: 5909 days
Last view: 5909 days
Posted on 07-22-06 02:11 AM, in Any kinks (or fetishes) of yours? Link
I don't like the idea that people younger than me can be called pedophiles.

):
Arwon

Bazu


 





Since: 11-18-05
From: Randwick, Sydney, NSW, Australia

Last post: 5909 days
Last view: 5909 days
Posted on 07-22-06 01:42 PM, in The Human Need For Hatred Link
Unless THEY'RE THE SAME PERSON!!!
Arwon

Bazu


 





Since: 11-18-05
From: Randwick, Sydney, NSW, Australia

Last post: 5909 days
Last view: 5909 days
Posted on 07-23-06 10:09 AM, in State Your Beliefs Link
"Studies show that private charity is more effective than government beaurocracy."

Which studies?
Arwon

Bazu


 





Since: 11-18-05
From: Randwick, Sydney, NSW, Australia

Last post: 5909 days
Last view: 5909 days
Posted on 07-23-06 07:32 PM, in Montenegrin independence. Link
BUT IF NOT WE MUST FIGHT

I'm basically a social democrat.


(edited by Arwon on 07-23-06 06:33 PM)
Arwon

Bazu


 





Since: 11-18-05
From: Randwick, Sydney, NSW, Australia

Last post: 5909 days
Last view: 5909 days
Posted on 07-23-06 07:39 PM, in State Your Beliefs Link
So you're basing this on Libertarian sources and what happened with church organisations during the Depression? Grand. I think I'll stick with Centrelink (our bureaucratic but servicable government welfare bureacracy, which pays for my dinner and keeps me from running myself into the ground trying to scratch together rent).

Hey, how does faith-based charity work when you have a secular society with like we do now where hardly anyone goes to church, let alone donates? How would charity pay old age pensions or student benefits or disability payments? Do atheists and others with deviant lifestyles get support? Why should we rely on the good grace and agendas of church organisations to cover society's lack of ability to keep people from starving in the streets? Why is it that it is demonstrably harder to get by if you're poor in the 1st world country with the least-developed social welfare system, than in other first world countries? Should we take this to a new thread?


(edited by Arwon on 07-23-06 06:41 PM)
Arwon

Bazu


 





Since: 11-18-05
From: Randwick, Sydney, NSW, Australia

Last post: 5909 days
Last view: 5909 days
Posted on 07-25-06 11:13 PM, in Agricultural subsidies: Doha's dead, promises are broken, back to reality Link
I dunno if anyone remembers October last year when:


The US will on Monday offer to end farm export subsidies in five years and slash its domestic subsidies by more than half, in an attempt to revive the flagging Doha round of trade talks.


Natch, hearts were a-flutter. Agricultural protectionism on the part of the US and EU is one of the worst features of the way global trade is set up. It's unfair and pretty directly killing people in the third world.

Some numbers


But [subsidies have] grown into an institutionalised nightmare preventing developing countries from fulfilling their potential in one of the few areas where they enjoy a natural advantage - agriculture. Europe and the US are the main culprits. It is economic and social madness for Europe to be growing, for instance, subsidised sugar beet when its average cost of production is more than double that of efficient exporters such as Brazil and Zambia. It is only possible thanks to ludicrous subsidies, including protective tariffs of up to 140%. As Kevin Watkins of Oxfam says: "The $1.6bn a year the EU gives to the sugar barons of East Anglia and the Paris Basin generates surpluses that deprive countries such as Thailand and Malawi of markets. Mozambique loses almost as much as a result of EU sugar policy as it gets in European aid."

The US is no better. America's 25,000 cotton farmers received more than $3bn in subsidies last year, equivalent to 100% of the market value of cotton output. This works out at a staggering subsidy of $230 an acre. West Africa, one of the mostdeprived places on earth, happens to be one of the most efficient cotton producers, with an estimated 11 million people dependent on cotton as their main source of income. But it can't compete with subsidised products from the US, which has 40% of world exports. If subsidies were removed, West Africa, according to IMF figures, could produce profitably at two thirds of US production costs.


Another example: Thanks to obscene subsidisation, American rice on the streets of Nigeria is actually cheaper than Nigerian produced rice. The result is that developing countries can't compete in these vital crops. They get pushed into other areas, cash-crops, producing solely for export. The result is dependence on the global market place as a supplier of cash-crops to the first world, loss of the ability to feed your own country cheaply, massive social effects as farmers get forced off the land by economic pressure (or sometimes, direct government clearing of small farmers to make way for big agrobusiness) and so forth. If you've ever seen pictures of a famine in a third world agricultural nation, THIS is one of the big reasons why.

So it was a very good think that the US was offering these cuts. Long overdue and it might've even guilted the EU into some action on its CAP. Fast-forward to now though, and we see that once again, the administration's tactics of "announce something cool then underfund, recant the promise, or gut the policy in the house later on" have come into play.

Doha collapses


EU Trade Commissioner Peter Mandelson has blamed the US for the collapse of the latest round of global trade talks.
US conditions attached to cutting farming subsidies were "unacceptable" for developing countries, he said.

But the US said it was "fully committed" to the talks and blamed Europe for its lack of ambition over reaching a deal to cut farming tariffs.

[...]

EU Commissioner Mandelson said he was "profoundly disappointed" that talks had stumbled, mainly as a result of America's inflexibility.

"What they're saying is that for every dollar that they strip out of their trade-distorting farm subsidies they want to be given a dollar's worth of market access in developing country markets," he said.


Ignoring the staggering hypocrisy of the EU statement here given that they're not even bothering to put their CAP on the table... the US here needs either a basic lesson in economics or to stop treating the rest of us like idiots. "Market access" won't be blocked, it's the invisible hand who'll drag the US out of the markets in which it is artificially competing... they only have "market access" now because of those damn subsidies. If they lose access it's the market's doing, which is the whole point of the exercise in the first place and the BASIC PRINCIPLE OF THE FREE TRADE THAT THE US TRUMPETS SO LOUDLY. What they're essentially asking for is a different form of assistance to their farmers to preserve their artificial market position in a new way.

Which would have a net impact of ZERO on the developing farmers who're presently getting screwed.

How about this: The US never gets to proclaim itself capitalist or pro-free trade until it stops this rot.


(edited by Arwon on 07-25-06 10:14 PM)
Arwon

Bazu


 





Since: 11-18-05
From: Randwick, Sydney, NSW, Australia

Last post: 5909 days
Last view: 5909 days
Posted on 07-26-06 12:05 AM, in Agricultural subsidies: Doha's dead, promises are broken, back to reality Link
the problem with that, though, is that the double standard between big rich countries and poor third world countries is such that countries which tried that would get squished by WTO rulings.

Also, if you stick tarriffs on imports to let your own stuff compete, as a third world country, you're making everything more expensive for your people, and that's not a good thing.
Arwon

Bazu


 





Since: 11-18-05
From: Randwick, Sydney, NSW, Australia

Last post: 5909 days
Last view: 5909 days
Posted on 07-26-06 12:32 AM, in Terrorism = Freedom? Link
Well blowing stuff up is cool.
Arwon

Bazu


 





Since: 11-18-05
From: Randwick, Sydney, NSW, Australia

Last post: 5909 days
Last view: 5909 days
Posted on 07-26-06 10:25 AM, in Taking a language Link
Go for Russian. It's going out of fashion these days, I feel bad for it.
Arwon

Bazu


 





Since: 11-18-05
From: Randwick, Sydney, NSW, Australia

Last post: 5909 days
Last view: 5909 days
Posted on 07-27-06 02:31 AM, in Agricultural subsidies: Doha's dead, promises are broken, back to reality Link
There's also the fact that it's shooting oneself in the foot in multiple ways. In a developed country like the USA or Australia or the EU, there's no reason for preserving any sector of the economy artificially... it damages you in the long term. You end up paying all this extra tax to keep farmers afloat out of some misguided sense of economic patriotism or simply to pander to special interest groups (happens here with protectionism as well, but only in a few areas and not to anywhere near the same extent as the EU and US), and you end up paying more for food in the end as well.

Meanwhile, you could be reaping the benefits of cheap food from overseas while spending taxpayer money elsewhere, and letting the agricultural sector move to areas it is efficient in (not sure what these are but there'd be some of them).

Of course, try explaining this to a bunch of idiot congressmen in the pockets of big agricultural businesses (or to a bunch of French bureaucrats or National Party politicians in marginal electorates, for that matter).
Arwon

Bazu


 





Since: 11-18-05
From: Randwick, Sydney, NSW, Australia

Last post: 5909 days
Last view: 5909 days
Posted on 07-30-06 05:23 AM, in Taking a language Link
Originally posted by HyperMackerel
One benefit of learning Chinese or Japanese is you're halfway to learning the other.


I dunno, not really.

Mandarin Chinese is a Sino-Tibetan language, Japanese is a language isolate with no known relatives. They share a lot of vocab and an alphabet, but the underlying structures and stuff are totally different from each other. It'd be like thinking knowing English helps you learn Latin or vice versa.


(edited by Arwon on 07-30-06 04:26 AM)
Arwon

Bazu


 





Since: 11-18-05
From: Randwick, Sydney, NSW, Australia

Last post: 5909 days
Last view: 5909 days
Posted on 07-31-06 03:02 AM, in WAR! Israel at war with Lebanon Link
That's just retarded, really. Do you seriously think people who criticise Israel are anti-semetic?

I think Tony Judt in Haaretz nailed it in this article in Haaretz talking about the complete reversal in Israel's image in the world and its loss of moral credibility and sympathy between 1967 and 2006:


Today only a tiny minority of outsiders see Israelis as victims. The true victims, it is now widely accepted, are the Palestinians. Indeed, Palestinians have now displaced Jews as the emblematic persecuted minority: vulnerable, humiliated and stateless. This unsought distinction does little to advance the Palestinian case any more than it ever helped Jews, but it has redefined Israel forever. It has become commonplace to compare Israel at best to an occupying colonizer, at worst to the South Africa of race laws and Bantustans. In this capacity Israel elicits scant sympathy even when its own citizens suffer: Dead Israelis - like the occasional assassinated white South African in the apartheid era, or British colonists hacked to death by native insurgents - are typically perceived abroad not as the victims of terrorism but as the collateral damage of their own government's mistaken policies.

Such comparisons are lethal to Israel's moral credibility. They strike at what was once its strongest suit: the claim of being a vulnerable island of democracy and decency in a sea of authoritarianism and cruelty; an oasis of rights and freedoms surrounded by a desert of repression. But democrats don't fence into Bantustans helpless people whose land they have conquered, and free men don't ignore international law and steal other men's homes. The contradictions of Israeli self-presentation - "we are very strong/we are very vulnerable"; "we are in control of our fate/we are the victims"; "we are a normal state/we demand special treatment" - are not new: they have been part of the country's peculiar identity almost from the outset. And Israel's insistent emphasis upon its isolation and uniqueness, its claim to be both victim and hero, were once part of its David versus Goliath appeal.



(edited by Arwon on 07-31-06 02:04 AM)
Arwon

Bazu


 





Since: 11-18-05
From: Randwick, Sydney, NSW, Australia

Last post: 5909 days
Last view: 5909 days
Posted on 07-31-06 03:11 AM, in Terrorism = Freedom? Link

what kind of terrorist group provides welfare to the poor?


I don't disagree with your overall post, but that's actually a common practise among popular resistance/terrorist type groups and kind of dovetails nicely with their goals and outlook. Surprise surprise, terrorists aren't one-dimensional evil. There's two big reasons, one cynical, one idealistic. First the cynicism: success hinges on popularity with the people they're defending/helping so it makes good practical sense to do such things.

Then the idealism: Such groups are mostly really passionate, hardcore and committed people (you have to be to risk everything and try to kill other people for your own ideas)... if you're willing enough to fight and die for something such as a group of people, chances are you're concerned enough to attempt to provide welfare and education and stuff where possible. It's kinda love, as well as hate, I guess.

I think it's possible to be a resistance movement and a terrorist group and a social justice organisation. Just makes things a bit more complex than most people would like or be willing to admit.


(edited by Arwon on 07-31-06 02:15 AM)
Arwon

Bazu


 





Since: 11-18-05
From: Randwick, Sydney, NSW, Australia

Last post: 5909 days
Last view: 5909 days
Posted on 07-31-06 07:50 AM, in Terrorism = Freedom? Link
In a word, yes.

That's why they called the PLO in Jordan and then later on in Lebanon a "state within a state" and that's why they call Hezbollah that now.
Arwon

Bazu


 





Since: 11-18-05
From: Randwick, Sydney, NSW, Australia

Last post: 5909 days
Last view: 5909 days
Posted on 07-31-06 12:04 PM, in Ethics: Insecticide Link
I think they're obviously a differnet category. animals don't have human rights for various reasons, but neither do they have zero--people shouldn't be needlessly cruel to them for example.

There's a heirarchy, though. What's okay to do to rats isn't okay for dolphins. In this graduated heirarchy, insects fall way down the list... and even then it breaks down between things like roaches and things like, say, spiders, which many people try not to kill because it makes them feel bad. Unless you're a committed member of certain religions, killing fast-breeding health-risk pests isn't unethical.
Arwon

Bazu


 





Since: 11-18-05
From: Randwick, Sydney, NSW, Australia

Last post: 5909 days
Last view: 5909 days
Posted on 08-01-06 05:27 AM, in Oh, bloody hell. Link
Originally posted by Jomb
Do you have to take the medication? Can you refuse? If you think you are doing fine dont let some doctor con you into taking medication. Is the medication expensive? Could there be a monetary motivation to them wanting you to buy it?


In the Australian health system I highly doubt it...
Arwon

Bazu


 





Since: 11-18-05
From: Randwick, Sydney, NSW, Australia

Last post: 5909 days
Last view: 5909 days
Posted on 08-01-06 06:03 AM, in Facial hair. Link
I think I've posted this before, but I've been sporting this for about the last year. Shaving got old.



Uh, the hair under the bandana is curly and brown.
Arwon

Bazu


 





Since: 11-18-05
From: Randwick, Sydney, NSW, Australia

Last post: 5909 days
Last view: 5909 days
Posted on 08-01-06 06:11 AM, in AcmlmBoard Favorite Game Finals Link
I was torn between Zelda:OoT, Melee and Civilisation IV... but since the latter's not an option I went with Melee for its replay value.

I fully expect Twilight Princess to become my new favourite though.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32
Acmlm's Board - I3 Archive - - Posts by Arwon


ABII

Acmlmboard 1.92.999, 9/17/2006
©2000-2006 Acmlm, Emuz, Blades, Xkeeper

Page rendered in 1.704 seconds; used 451.13 kB (max 579.69 kB)