Disqus - Friends of pcisbs

Re: Deficit Reduction

Hominid — Tue, 16 Nov 2010 07:43:56 -0000

This new format is stupid.

Re: Natural Is Not Always Better

Hominid — Wed, 17 Nov 2010 07:26:32 -0000

All the environmental and economic problems of the world are exacerbated to the point of unsustainability by excess population.

Re: Natural Is Not Always Better

Hominid — Wed, 17 Nov 2010 12:34:42 -0000

The libs have their set of delusions and the cons have theirs.

Re: Who Fed the Tiger?

Hominid — Fri, 19 Nov 2010 07:06:26 -0000

Altosackbuteer has correctly enumertated the massive socioeconomic problems confronting China. China's problems, however, do not diminish our own. Keep in mind, moreover, that China is ruled by a despotic regime which can and will do whatever it must to preserve itself, including eliminating large numbers of problematic Chinese and, if pushed far enough, waging war with its enormous and powerful military.

Re: If Only Obama Would Say

Hominid — Fri, 19 Nov 2010 07:13:48 -0000

Ms Bila, you've offered one of the most succinct, lucid, and sane presidential policy statements I've ever read. Thanx. I know that you know that Obo disagrees with everyone of your points and I'm pretty sure you know why.

Re: Don’t Touch My Junk

Hominid — Fri, 19 Nov 2010 07:24:22 -0000

TSA is all about three sinister goals: creating the false belief that the government is protecting Americans from terrorists, political correctness, and most significantly, pushing the envelop on oppression to see just how acquiescent to control Americans are. And as for the excuse that the TSA agents are 'just following orders,' so were Nazis just following orders. That dog don't hunt. If one is willing to violate people in the name of keeping their job, they're as guilty as their superiors.

Re: National Security: It’s Time To Hulk Out

Hominid — Fri, 19 Nov 2010 08:10:42 -0000

TSA is all about three sinister goals: creating the false belief that the government is protecting Americans from terrorists, political correctness, and, most significantly, pushing the envelop on oppression to see just how acquiescent to control Americans are.

los lobos - I suspect you're acting as a well-intentioned agent provocateur, because, as you know full well, us American 'white boys' are anything but cowardly - remember Midway, Omaha Beach, Iwo, The Bulge, Pusan, Chosin Reservoir, Dak To, Hue, Fallujah to mention just a few of the more recent of the innumerable examples - oh, and let's remember the Alamo!

Re: Who Fed the Tiger?

Hominid — Fri, 19 Nov 2010 11:29:12 -0000

pudatl, you left out china's common practices of industrial espionage and counterfeiting.

Re: Who Fed the Tiger?

Hominid — Fri, 19 Nov 2010 17:14:23 -0000

Trunchion - that's the difference - we don't do that - we triumph without brutality.

Jake Miami, good post, tho I doubt most will get it.

Life = competition.

Re: Don’t Touch My Junk

Hominid — Fri, 19 Nov 2010 17:24:15 -0000

You guys who criticize the current methodology and suggest an obviously more effective methodology, while technically correct, miss the point that the current methodology is not intended to be an effective counterterrorist measure, but to test the tolerance of the American people for oppression.

Re: Who Fed the Tiger?

Hominid — Sat, 20 Nov 2010 08:16:57 -0000

At first, I thought this new format a failure. But, now that it's up & running, I like it. Notably, however, at least one raving poster is still spewing vulgar and mindless insults. Why aren't his posts screened out?

I'll venture a second criticism - cautiously because it's sure to raise hackles - long, rambling, preachy essays that serve little purpose except to display that the poster remembers something from hi-school history, has quickly looked up something on Wiki, or can parrot someone else's op-ed are tedious and unproductive. Go ahead, let me have it with both barrels.

Re: If Only Obama Would Say

Hominid — Sat, 20 Nov 2010 08:23:19 -0000

You're confusing specific 'plans' of action with 'policies.' These are precise and focused policy statements addressed at the most pressing issues we face and not rhetorical at all. It's because you don't like these policies that you wish to falsely discredit them - a standard leftist tactic.

Re: Who Fed the Tiger?

Hominid — Sat, 20 Nov 2010 10:20:20 -0000

I don't disagree at all with your point, but argument development was not
the basis my criticism. I'm whining about long, preachy essays that don't
develop a pertinent argument.

Re: Who Fed the Tiger?

Hominid — Sat, 20 Nov 2010 10:28:02 -0000

If you respond to the potty-mouthed adolescent, you're satisfying his perverse need for attention.

Re: Who Fed the Tiger?

Hominid — Sat, 20 Nov 2010 12:04:32 -0000

I admire your optimism, but fear it is unfounded.

'and yet America today is more productive in manufacturing than ever before in its history.'

Productivity does not equal production. Our factories are more EFFICIENT producers (productivity is up), but we PRODUCE a smaller share of what is consumed by the world than in the past (production is down).

'mechanization has enabled us to produce the SAME amount of manufacturing wealth as before (more actually) with far fewer people.'

Dollar for dollar, manufacturing is a declining sector of our wealth. We are definitely NOT producing the same amount of manufacturing wealth - not even close.

IT is so easy that it will never employ large numbers of people - it's already saturated. Every country is already competing with us.

In reality, very few of us are 'inventive, motivated, creative, energetic, education-thirsting, paradigm-shattering and highly competitive people.' The Edisons, Fords, etc are exceptional people and the one's who emerge from today onward do not need the masses of common Americans - the rest of the world is available to them at a much lower cost.

Re: Don’t Touch My Junk

Hominid — Sat, 20 Nov 2010 13:20:31 -0000

Thanx, Uptown, glad there are some folks who aren't distracted by red
herrings.

Re: Don’t Touch My Junk

Hominid — Sat, 20 Nov 2010 13:44:50 -0000

Good point. Here's another question.

Evidently, the TSA now has decided that pilots need not be subjected to pat-downs. That means TSA agents are expected to use DISCERNMENT and it's a tacit acknowledgment that pilots are very unlikely to be threats (reverse profiling??). If they are capable of that level of discernment, are they not capable of recognizing octogenarians, preteens, military vets, and senators are not threats (but assets) and not wasting time searching them? Are they not capable of recognizing Middle Easterners, North Africans, Indonesians, and any furtive-eyed young men and women acting suspiciously and spend some time interrogating them?

Re: Who Fed the Tiger?

Hominid — Sun, 21 Nov 2010 07:58:14 -0000

I agree that elimination of corporate taxes and capping dividend & cap gains
at a low rate would help enormously to lower the cost of manufacturing in
the US and could partially and temporarily compensate for higher wage costs.

Imposing protectionist tariffs, in contrast, is a simplistic notion that we
already know doesn't work (like raising taxes to pay for deficits) - it
drives up consumer prices in the US, other countries respond in kind such
that export sales decline, and it's a major contributor to economic
depression and war. It may help some workers in certain sectors, but harms
many others.

I come from a long line of wage laborers, have been one myself, and have
great respect for competent labor - but the future of labor looks bleak due
to continuing advances in production, distribution, and communication
technology that enables globalization and the fact that the labor supply
abounds - demand for labor is declining and supply is increasing (you know
what that means).

Re: In Defense Of Faith

Hominid — Sun, 21 Nov 2010 08:45:47 -0000

Religion is not the source of morality - moral codes predate organized religion by thousands of years (e.g., Code of Hammurabi, ca. 1790 BC). Moreover, religions have been anything but 'moral' for most of their histories.

Morality can be based in reasoned pragmatism — a mindset evinced by such maxims as do unto others as you would have them do unto you; live and let live; he who lives by the sword, dies by the sword, to mention the more obvious — without the baggage of mysticism.

To the extent that the moral codes of some modern religions and nontheistic ethics seek the same goal of peaceful coexistence, they are largely compatible. Religionists argue that the absence of an ultimate consequence obviates any motivation to be good. I submit that no more incentive is needed than the relief of not having to constantly look over one’s shoulder or the inner warmth that flows from an act of kindness.

Accept the moral code of Christianity to be sure, but reject the silly mythos which can only lead to magical thinking and trouble.

All real things are conditional and relative and good decisions require perspicacity, intellection, and good judgment. Dogma and absolutism are for fools.

Re: In Defense Of Faith

Hominid — Sun, 21 Nov 2010 12:27:45 -0000

What is a person? What is consciousness? Good luck defining personhood and consciousness. If an embryonic human being is not a person, what is it?

Ask the people around you if they would prefer to have been aborted and see what they reply.

Re: Who Fed the Tiger?

Hominid — Sun, 21 Nov 2010 12:53:56 -0000

Laughing,
I am sympathetic to most of your points, but I still think you're viewing the scene through rose tinted glasses. The US still produces a lot of manufactured goods, but our MARKET SHARE is rapidly shrinking. You must realize that most of the 'sectors' you mention in which we are 'ahead' are SERVICE sectors, not PRODUCTION. While services count in GDP, they do not create wealth, they only distribute it. Wealth production comes from agriculture, resource extraction-refining, manufacturing, and labor. As I've mentioned, technology continues to diminish the value of labor. I agree, however, that the US is still maintains an environment that fosters the best science and engineering. Very few people have what it takes to be scientists, engineers, innovators, and entrepreneurs and the truth is we don't need many such people to begin with. The problem is that there are no longer enough jobs to go around.

Re: In Defense Of Faith

Hominid — Sun, 21 Nov 2010 16:07:32 -0000

The woman is the crucible of all that matters, the man is the protector of the crucible.

Re: In Defense Of Faith

Hominid — Sun, 21 Nov 2010 16:39:38 -0000

Yes, Ed, women can withstand high temperatures.

Re: In Defense Of Faith

Hominid — Sun, 21 Nov 2010 16:41:28 -0000

To bad you haven't read and understood Greek philo.

Re: In Defense Of Faith

Hominid — Sun, 21 Nov 2010 16:49:29 -0000

Ed admits that he is not a man.