 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Warp" <war### [at] tag povrayorg> wrote
> > (I'd go on but the truth is far too, I said I'd not go on)
> Is there some reason you are posting these political rants here?
Indeed. It's distracting our focus from Haskell and PHB (and occasional anti
MS) rants. <g>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
alphaQuad wrote:
> There should been no lawmakers because they would only make corrupt law. I
> believe the founding fathers lacked the guidance and intelligence to write a
> workable constitution.
They wrote a perfectly workable constitution. They left it to people
who decided not to follow it.
Regards,
John
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Darren New wrote:
> Warp wrote:
>> especially taking into account how many years it takes
>> to build a civilization which can support itself.
>
> I suspect you'd mostly have to replace the government with something
> that respected basic property rights before pouring money in would help
> anything. If you're going to kick out successful farmers and hand the
> land over to cronies who don't know how to manage it, you're going to
> have famines regardless of how much cash gets dumped into the economy.
And if you institute honest government, the charity quickly becomes
unnecessary.
The only reason the West got an economic leap on the rest of the world
is because our forebears reduced the crookedness of the government by a
sufficient degree to free up wealth for capital formation. In much of
the world the situation is that as soon as you have two pennies to rub
together, someone from the government takes one of them (if not both).
Regards,
John
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
alphaQuad wrote:
> I think there is something far more difficult than solving world hunger.
>
> Take over the most deadly nation in the world, dance on its constitution with
> corrupt law, ignore their rights, render congress irrelevant by veto and
> install a complete idiot as a puppet president.
> (I'd go on but the truth is far too, I said I'd not go on)
>
> Oh wait that’s been done. I rest my case.
>
>
Done by people who, I suspect you would believe, are driven only by
greed and a lust for power and money and fueled by a control of the
media and a good deal of cash. So, why then does no one counter that
with a group of people driven by a want to do what they think is right
at the sacrifice of their own time and money? Oh, that group is too busy
dealing with straw man arguments.
You asked why it wasn't done already, I gave you some logistical
problems that need solutions. Instead of looking at them, you start
bashing a puppet that wasn't even a part of the argument. Frankly, stuff
like that is why political supporters on both sides can continue to
scream about the 'opponents side' being unable to argue.
Why, then, do you believe that solving world hunger is such an easy
problem to solve, and why then do you not do it your self? Stop waiting
for someone else to fix it, get up, raise some money, and solve the
problem. Pure idealism is great, but you need to do something with it
other then just talking about it.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
4748bed7@news.povray.org...
> Is there some reason you are posting these political rants here?
>
> --
> - Warp
I'll just copy this one and paste it as reply to some of your own posts
here.
Marc
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
M_a_r_c <jac### [at] wanadoofr> wrote:
> I'll just copy this one and paste it as reply to some of your own posts
> here.
I really fail to see how that is relevant. I have always *opposed* heavy
criticism, especially of other nations and their leaders.
But do whatever you want. I'll just tell you to fuck off.
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
47495f59@news.povray.org...
> I really fail to see how that is relevant. I have always *opposed* heavy
> criticism, especially of other nations and their leaders.
>
> But do whatever you want. I'll just tell you to fuck off.
>
> --
I was referring to "political rants" in general. It does not always apply to
leaders.
BTW alphaQuad is not criticizing an *other* nation leader.
Marc
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
M_a_r_c <jac### [at] wanadoofr> wrote:
> BTW alphaQuad is not criticizing an *other* nation leader.
I never said he was.
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp wrote:
> M_a_r_c <jac### [at] wanadoofr> wrote:
>> I'll just copy this one and paste it as reply to some of your own posts
>> here.
>
> I really fail to see how that is relevant. I have always *opposed* heavy
> criticism, especially of other nations and their leaders.
>
> But do whatever you want. I'll just tell you to fuck off.
>
from "News Server Acceptable Use Policy" in p.a.faq:
Users of this news server may not post messages that could
reasonably be expected, by today's standards, to cause another
reasonable person to not want to use or visit this server due
to a feeling of harassment. Personal attacks, exhibiting
insulting or abusive behavior, are not an acceptable activity
on this news server. Likewise, the use of profanity is also
considered unacceptable.
And anticipating your reply: no, something does not become a personal
attack when someone dares to suggest you said something wrong. For
instance this post isn't one. It is merely a kind request to behave in
public. Rule of thumb: don't use the f-word.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
andrel <a_l### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
> don't use the f-word.
I'll stop using the f-word when people stop being assholes.
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
