A certain political topic...

[Havoc]

Dare I start the discussion? What are the chances of it remaining PEACEful?

[Elrond]

Dare I start the discussion? What are the chances of it remaining PEACEful?

So far it is peaceful ;) ; but then again, we haven't started yet; have we? :D

[thingirl]

So far it is peaceful ;) ; but then again, we haven't started yet; have we? :D

Well, if he and I are going to go at it, you might want to delete the thread now ;)

[Elrond]

Well, if he and I are going to go at it, you might want to delete the thread now ;)

Lol ... easier solution: one of us doesn't post! :D

[Havoc]

I'm sure I'd get a PRIZE for the NOBLE action of locking the thread, thereby preventing conflicts. :p

[thingirl]

That would have to be you. :p Anyway, we should stop spamming a thread that doesn't exist :confused:

EDIT: Oh God. Obama should NOT have gotten that. No shot in... the opposite of Heaven. Unless he spends the cash prize on decreasing the National debt. Which I know he wont.

[Elrond]

That would have to be you. :p Anyway, we should stop spamming a thread that doesn't exist :confused:

EDIT: Oh God. Obama should NOT have gotten that. No shot in... the opposite of Heaven. Unless he spends the cash prize on decreasing the National debt. Which I know he wont.

Are we talking about the national debt that GWB shot into the stratosphere? Or are we talking about the 268 billion budget surplus that GWB turned into a a 500 billion deficit in 8 years?

[thingirl]

OK, fine. GWB increased it. But, where did the money for all these stimulus bills come from? And there was a war going on, which warranted the increased spending.

[Elrond]

OK, fine. GWB increased it. But, where did the money for all these stimulus bills come from? And there was a war going on, which warranted the increased spending.

The money for the stimulus bills came from Japan, China, Saudi Arabia and other countries that lent money to the US. The US owes China roughly 500 billion dollars!

There wasn't a war going on. GWB started 2 wars and couldn't finish them. Doesn't it seem absurd that the US wrapped up WWII in 5 years and GWB could not wrap up Iraq in 6 years?

[thingirl]

Yes, the money came from other countries, thereby increasing the debt.

If I remember correctly, WWII was going on for 2 years before the US joined (after a terrorist attack). And at that point, the USSR joined too. Where as in the Iraq war, the US started it (after a terrorist attack) and I don't think they had any powerful allies.

EDIT: I'm watching a video (http://abcnews.go.com/Video/playerIndex?id=8791710) of his acceptance speech. In it he says "To be honest, I do not feel that I deserve to be in the company of so many of the transformative figures who have been honored by this prize."

[Elrond]

If I remember correctly, WWII was going on for 2 years before the US joined (after a terrorist attack). And at that point, the USSR joined too. Where as in the Iraq war, the US started it (after a terrorist attack) and I don't think they had any powerful allies.

Hahaha, there are so many contradictions in the above sentences.

1- Pearl Harbor was not a terrorist attack. It came after Japan declared war on the US.
2- The US bailed out its allies in WWII (including Russia) and was fighting the Axis (Germany, Japan, Italy) on 2 fronts.
3- Whereas in Iraq (1 weak country), the Saddam regime was pathetically weak! And the US had powerful allies in Iraq (i.e. Britain!). Yet the US cannot seem to finish that war!
4- Iraq had nothing to do with the terrorist attack on the US! GWB ordered investigation said so!

[thingirl]

He said he doesn't deserve it. Go see my edit.

[Elrond]

He said he doesn't deserve it. Go see my edit.

But that wasn't our discussion point! Was it? It was the US budget deficit and what caused it to balloon over the past few years!

[thingirl]

DEFEAT! You have been defeated. Your attempt at changing the subject had FAILED. You now must admit that you are wrong (EDIT: ) and that you forget that at 6 or 7 you can't remember or comprihend everything, especially if your parents don't tell you stuff.

On another note- the last three seconds of the video show Obama walking off the stage while someone says "What will you do with the money, Mr. President?"

[Elrond]

DEFEAT! You have been defeated. Your attempt at changing the subject had FAILED. You now must admit that you are wrong.

On another note- the last three seconds of the video show Obama walking off the stage while someone says "What will you do with the money, Mr. President?"

Regarding your first sentence:

I hit "define: projection" on google and came up with this:

In psychology, psychological projection (or projection bias) is a defense mechanism where a person's personal attributes, unacceptable or unwanted thoughts, and/or emotions are ascribed onto another person or people. ...

It was you, my dear, who ran away from our little side discussion by reverting back to the original Nobel Peace Prize for Obama.

As to whether he deserves it or not, we both agree: he doesn't. I don't think that the prize was meant to be given to a person overseeing 2 wars (Iraq and Afghanistan).

Chao!

[thingirl]

I thought I was talking to me with the first sentace. And I was more trying to "FLEE from battle".

[Elrond]

I thought I was talking to me with the first sentace. And I was more trying to "FLEE from battle".

If you were talking to yourself, then type: "Thingirl talking to herself" before posting ;) . I would have understood it then!

[thingirl]

Ah, good point.

[zmflavius]

OK, fine. GWB increased it. But, where did the money for all these stimulus bills come from? And there was a war going on, which warranted the increased spending.

Sorry if I'm insulting you, but do you know what the stimulus bill is? The stimulus bill is basically several hundred billion dollars that Obama lends out as an extremely high interest loan to big companies, so that these companies can use the money to boost their company back up. And in fact, the bill worked. We've made back all the money we doled out, plus the exorbitant interest.

Are we talking about the national debt that GWB shot into the stratosphere? Or are we talking about the 268 billion budget surplus that GWB turned into a a 500 billion deficit in 8 years?

Actually, it's millions. Bill Clinton left office with a 200 million dollar surplus. GWB turned it into a gigantic deficit to fight two wars.

Obviously, it's only a coincidence that Iraq, a major producer of oil, was invaded by a major oil magnate. [/sarcasm]

Hahaha, there are so many contradictions in the above sentences.

1- Pearl Harbor was not a terrorist attack. It came after Japan declared war on the US.
2- The US bailed out its allies in WWII (including Russia) and was fighting the Axis (Germany, Japan, Italy) on 2 fronts.
3- Whereas in Iraq (1 weak country), the Saddam regime was pathetically weak! And the US had powerful allies in Iraq (i.e. Britain!). Yet the US cannot seem to finish that war!
4- Iraq had nothing to do with the terrorist attack on the US! GWB ordered investigation said so!

1 - Quite right. It was also a major strategic error for the Japanese, not only because it brought the US into the war while inflicting only minimal damage to them.
2 - USSR. Not Russia. Though USSR did join the Allies only six months earlier.
3 - You clearly are operating from a major misconception. Besides the fact that the US is bearing the brunt of that war (nobody else is doing anything but currying favor with the US), you seem to be operating from the assumption that the US, being technologically "superior" should be able to easily win the war. Yes, the Saddam regime was pathetically weak, BUT, the insurgents are resourceful, innovative, and not willing to give up easily. They can destroy a $140000 US Humvee with a $10 roadside bomb! Iraq ended up like Vietnam because of hawks in Washington who were unwilling to see past their own hubris.
4 - That is probably true. It is also more likely than not that the "investigation"'s results were decided before it was finished.

[thingirl]

I thought that the main receivers of the package were still being taken to court over not repaying their debt.

[Elrond]

Thank you ZM for rekindling the flame. And thank you for correcting me on Clinton's surplus. I'll have to read up more on it. In the meantime, I look forward to a response to Thingirl's rebuttal!

EDIT: On the budget surplus, here is a quote and a link:

President Clinton announces another record budget surplus

From CNN White House Correspondent Kelly Wallace

September 27, 2000
Web posted at: 4:51 p.m. EDT (2051 GMT)

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- President Clinton announced Wednesday that the federal budget surplus for fiscal year 2000 amounted to at least $230 billion, making it the largest in U.S. history and topping last year's record surplus of $122.7 billion.

Link: Link to CNN News Item on Surplus (http://edition.cnn.com/2000/ALLPOLITICS/stories/09/27/clinton.surplus/)

[zmflavius]

I thought that the main receivers of the package were still being taken to court over not repaying their debt.

Name them.

edit:ehhh...Elrond, your link is broken.

[thingirl]

Auntie...

Yeah, yeah, I know.

Can I do it?

Fine.

OK, Auntie, this is for you. DEFEAT! You have been defeated. Your attempt at recovering your dignity has FAILED! You must now walk away in shame.

[zmflavius]

I'm not sure what that little bit meant...but I get the idea that you seem to be conceding.

[thingirl]

Yes. Alanne providing me with a way to say "note from Thingirl to Thingirl".

[thingirl]

This is a double post, but I feel no shame.

Mom (talking to dad): "I know the Nobel Peace Prize doesn't really mean much of anything, but..."
Dad: "Who won it?"
Me: "OBAMA!"
Dad: "For what?"

And apparently, the nominations were sealed in early Feb. When he had been in office for all of 12 days. Yeah.

[zmflavius]

This is a double post, but I feel no shame.

Mom (talking to dad): "I know the Nobel Peace Prize doesn't really mean anything, but..."
Dad: "Who won it?"
Me: "OBAMA!"
Dad: "For what?"

And apparently, the nominations were sealed in early Feb. When he had been in office for all of 12 days. Yeah.

The winner of the Nobel Prize is not decided in early February. Someone may have submitted his name early on and in the nine months that followed, the Nobel committee evidently decided that he did help promote world peace. Besides which, do you think the world is more peaceful now?

Also...
"I know the Nobel Peace Prize doesn't really mean anything, but..."
Did she actually say that?

[smv1973]

I'm sure I'd get a PRIZE for the NOBLE action of locking the thread, thereby preventing conflicts. :p

I wish I had the power to lock this thread because I would. Obama winning the Nobel Peace Prize is just a joke, And a bad joke.

[thingirl]

I thought I typed "much of anything". She did say "I know [it] doesn't really mean much of anything." And with her, stuff like that sort of means "Well, this happened and I'm trying to soften it..."

EDIT: @ SMV: I know you're not a christian, but: AMEN!!!!!!

[Oldschool]

1- Pearl Harbor was not a terrorist attack. It came after Japan declared war on the US.



The Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor came before any declaration of war by Japan. Actually the Japanese were still in peace talks with the U.S. when the attack started.

[zmflavius]

I wish I had the power to lock this thread because I would. Obama winning the Nobel Peace Prize is just a joke, And a bad joke.

(seriously, don't bad-rep me)

Locking a thread because you disagree with the political views expressed is really, really immature.

[thingirl]

Doh! Of course they did! Because Congress declared war the day after (12/7/41 being a Sunday). My point was that both WWII and Iraq started after terrorist attacks. But, since Iraq didn't...

[zmflavius]

doh! Of course they did! Because congress declared war the day after (12/7/41 being a sunday). My point was that both wwii and iraq started after terrorist attacks. But, since iraq didn't...

wwii didn't either! It's called a preemptive strike!

[texlaw1992]

Someone asked what Obama was doing with the money. He's donating it to charity.

Regardless of your opinion on Obama, any US citizen winning a Nobel prize is good for the country.

Bit of Nobel trivia now: Does anyone know why there is no Nobel prize in mathematics?

Nobel had a girlfriend who used to cheat on him with a mathematician (seriously).

[thingirl]

What charity? Planned Parenthood? Oh wait, that's not a charity. Good, because (and let the hate mail come flooding in) abortion is totally, completely, undoubtedly wrong.

It's true that any US citizen winning any Nobel Prize, but Obama winning the Peace Prize? Come on...

[zmflavius]

What charity? Planned Parenthood? Oh wait, that's not a charity. Good, because (and let the hate mail come flooding in) abortion is totally, completely, undoubtedly wrong.

It's true that any US citizen winning any Nobel Prize, but Obama winning the Peace Prize? Come on...

Can you name a person who has contributed more to peace?

Even if he didn't contribute much to peace, almost nobody contributed as much.

[Elrond]

What charity? Planned Parenthood? Oh wait, that's not a charity. Good, because (and let the hate mail come flooding in) abortion is totally, completely, undoubtedly wrong.

It's true that any US citizen winning any Nobel Prize, but Obama winning the Peace Prize? Come on...

Re: abortion being totally, completely wrong! Does that apply for cases when the life of the mother is in danger? Or when it is beyond any reasonable doubt that the fetus is suffering from a serious deformity?

Your second paragraph contradicts itself. The first is all inclusive of Americans; and the second part excludes Obama! Don't you think that your President is American (whether you like him or not; and since you're too young to vote you should hold utter respect for the office of the President and the person holding hit).

[Young Ned]

I always thought it was amusing that the man who invented dynamite also established the Nobel Peace Prize... :cool:

[Havoc]

That actualy was the reason he founded the prizes.

"The erroneous publication in 1888 of a premature obituary of Nobel by a French newspaper, condemning him for his invention of dynamite, is said to have brought about his decision to leave a better legacy after his death.[2] The obituary stated Le marchand de la mort est mort ("The merchant of death is dead") and went on to say, "Dr. Alfred Nobel, who became rich by finding ways to kill more people faster than ever before, died yesterday."[3] On 27 November 1895, at the Swedish-Norwegian Club in Paris, Nobel signed his last will and testament and set aside the bulk of his estate to establish the Nobel Prizes, to be awarded annually without distinction of nationality."

[thingirl]

@ Elrond: Please understand that I forget that my brain starts to go after ~8:30PM, which is when I posted that. As for abortion, If the mother is in psychical danger, I'm only slightly willing to say it's OK. If the child is suffering from a serious deformity, then I still have to say abortion is wrong. The child might die shortly after birth, but he/she should at least be given a chance.

@ Havoc: Nice find- repped.

[Daffanka]

I wish I had the power to lock this thread because I would. Obama winning the Nobel Peace Prize is just a joke, And a bad joke.

Yeah I gotta agree with this. I'm a big Obama supporter and I think he's the best thing that's happened to your country in a while, but he hasn't exactly done much for peace (or at all) to deserve it, he's not even a year into his candidacy.

It's almost as confusing as the people who call him a communist for trying to institute a health system that's been proven to work better than the one you have now, but I guess healthcare isn't the topic right now.

e: Obama's Nobel prize, not the thread locking.

[Oldschool]

Re: Nobel's invention of dynamite.

If I'm not mistaken Nobel's intention for dynamite was principally, and perhaps solely, for mining.

[Elrond]

As for abortion, If the mother is in psychical danger, I'm only slightly willing to say it's OK.

Thingirl, common sense, objectivity, and priorities say that a mother (in most cases already a mother of another child or more and wife of a man) as the cornerstone of the family should not be sacrificed to allow the birth of a child. Mother takes precedence over child if the cold, hard choice has to be made. Might not sound too nice; but Ce la Vie!

So, abortion becomes an obligation if the mother's life is in danger!

[Badstench]

I've been watching the happenings in Tunisia and Egypt closely, especially in Egypt.

To start this discusiion, I have to admit that I've been left feeling like my head has been floating somewhere among clouds no. 9 when it comes to my knowledge of "how-things-are" in Egypt.

I always thought of Egypt as being 'West' friendly, a tourist destination where I would visit one day to view the Pyramids etc. I understood that Egypt is a Moslem country, but more moderate than countries like Iran and Afghanistan. I liked to think it was a country where religious differences weren't an important issue. I still don't know any different, but I am waking up to the knowledge that what I thought against what is real are two different things.

I am quite naive.

And because of my new-found awakening, I also find myself getting angry.

But, let me backtrack...

The riots in Tunisia started because the common people were feeling 'the bite' of increasing food costs and lack of jobs. The demonstrations against the ruling government weren't politically or religiously inflamed; it boiled down to basic human requirements.

And then the Egyptian people complained about the same things. All the protesters wanted was a society in which they could live with dignity and the wherewithall to nurture their families.

These are things I take for granted in New Zealand.

The truth is, I'm horribly confused about the situation. But, the more I read... the more I become interested and the more I research the underlying cause for the unrest.

I've reached a tentative conclusion... but I'm not sure it's the right one.

I continue to watch developments in hope my understanding will be helped.

[texlaw1992]

The political problem in most Arab countries is that the ones in power for so long have succeeded in crushing all dissent that often the only viable opposition is the Islamic fundamentalists. While there is a secular opposition in Egypt, the Muslim Brotherhood (fundamentalist) is by far the strongest and most organized opposition group.

I think most of the Arab "street" has learned from Iran that they do not want to go from a secular dictatorship to a religious dictatorship. The key will be whether a secular opposition can get its act together to be the true alternative to the existing regime. If not, the cure (a fundamentalist regime) will be worse than the disease (a secular dictatorship).

I have a friend/client from Egypt who has wanted Mubarak gone for a long time. He thinks the Muslim Brotherhood is the answer. I don't, but right now he's very excited about what's happening. We'll see.

[Tetracapillactomist]

This might be the most distressing part of life in the XXI century.

Short-term strategies: re-entrenchment behind party, political, ideological, religious lines.
Surging Christian fundamentalism, Islamic fundamentalism, America split in two, the Arctic split in twenty, heads split into smithereens. (Divide and conquer? - don't worry about providing accurate numbers to any of the above... :)) Increasing rhetoric. Increasing ferocity. Increasing disregard for anything conciliatory, reasonable, unifying, pacifying, normalising - or simply humane, maybe even Human. (Yes, the desire to gorge on the enemy's blood is human too - no greater eloquence is needed to prove that we are first and foremost sanguinary animals who somehow stumbled upon a high-functioning brain... Give a chimp a pound of flesh, and you'll have fed him once; teach a chimp how to use an automatic assault rifle - or better yet, a "nucular" arsenal - and behold the wonder that ensues! :)) Back to the Crusades and the Jihad - except we no longer need Popes to declare it; corporate and political ambitions, along with g(l)ory dreams dreamt by angry Imams helm this ship headed for the vortex in the middle of the storming blood-red sea.

It would appear that the funnel is growing in size and power. Giant youth-magnets exert increasing attraction, superficially opposite centres of gravity sharing similar agendas (of domination and ever-increasing spheres of influence), vying for the top spot - or readying to bring about the Apocalypse... Waiting, even praying for, dreaming of (!) and welcoming the "End of the World", billions living not for life, but for the Afterlife - for DEATH! Living, chanting, hoping - for DEATH, then Salvation. So, arguably, a dark, blood-red cloud conjured by an expanding, strengthening cult Death, drawing millions of new worshippers of Death. Rampant insanity, the Age of Reason gone... Whoever gets caught in the middle: get ready for the ride!

Ecce Homo! - and "Eppur si muove!" (uttered in quieter whispers now, than in Galileo's time perhaps) - sure, Earth is moving, but where is it headed...

I of course will not apologise for not engaging in the details, important as they may be (aren't they all?...) - there are too many omniscient ones already claiming history, politics or economy a "science"... and I acknowledge that the political arena in particular has turned into a googolplex-dollar mega-successful "reality show", and the most engrossing 24-hour soap opera that ever was. "Come one, come all!..."

In the final count, the "ordinary people" (hoodwinked, bamboozled, cajoled for good destabilising measure ;)), whose interests all this is claimed to serve, must still fend for themselves, while trying to maintain their balance, as the rug is pulled out from under their feet. Ha! The whole world is a rip-roaring stage! (As for victims of atrocities and genocides? What? Who has time and money to care? :rolleyes: They fulfill one role and are expected to perform it well after so much live rehearsal: which is to just DIE.)

I'm not bitter... :) Why on earth should I be? I'm playing games when time allows. I simply took a certain perspective, silly and irrelevant as it may be. :) Perhaps I failed to look at the details carefully enough. Failed to consider all the subtleties of all the facts...

Facts? What facts?! The political landscape is in a constant shift, and individual politicians are generally pawns, or fools, or aspiring kings, inconsequential farts in a hot skillet (true, there are colossally imbecilic ones - and others that can tie their shoelaces...) - but there does seem to be developing now this overarching trend of blind faith, or its opposite, a cynical denial of human life's and civilisation's worth, greed, division, tribal mentality, mistrust and xenophobic hatred. Oh, I know, it was always so, and times and things never have been better. :) Watch out superpowers: the barbarians are at the gates, and are pounding on them with renewed determination - from without, but also from within. But they just wanna have fun... The dawn of a new age: the dawn of the blind and invisible sun.

Long-term strategy: it is preferable to sow the seeds of victory, and wait patiently for their germination; when the plan(t)s mature, the ripened fruit will simply drop into your hands. (Can you help me with a quote, ZM?;))
There are seeds being sown and lands bought and leased in neglected Africa. (Well, clearly, not all neglect it...). And mighty America, floundering like a new-born baby, is being kept on its feet by generously lent samaritan stilts and crutches. (Clearly, there are still charitable souls left in the world... :)) Well, as they used to shout: "The King is dead! Long live the King!"
He who laughs last - gets to finish his meal... ;)

-----------------

These are just musings, written once more at the end-of-life stage of a candle being burnt at both ends. (For all I know it may have enough flame left to burn my hands and bridges too...)

I take no responsibility for their veracity - should they prove true, such coincidence is purely accidental; nor am I to be held liable, as I didn't cause any of the events that brought on the "soliloquy". It then follows that it's a simple case of the blind squirrel having found a nut... :)

They're probably fictional. Not to mention barking mad. :)

Pay no heed...
(I don't hold the answers.)

[zmflavius]

Long-term strategy: it is preferable to sow the seeds of victory, and wait patiently for their germination; when the plan(t)s mature, the ripened fruit will simply drop into your hands. (Can you help me with a quote, ZM?;))


You mean a quote with a meaning to that effect?

[Tetracapillactomist]

Yes, in fact - I thought there was a chance you may recognise the idea and a name might flash through your head, which would make it easier to locate an actual quote; or even know the quote.
I'm guessing, no such luck, but thanks all the same for inquiring. :)

I might have tried to find a quote myself, but felt too tired to even attempt.

As I recall, the thought comes from Sun Tzu, but I'm not certain...

I guess I will try to find it now - I think it might not be so easy, as it isn't one of his (is it his?) widely quoted ones.

[Elrond]

Simplifying the situation in Tunisia or Egypt to "bread and jobs" is oversimplifying the situation. Communism provided bread, jobs, and residences to all (more or less); but it still didn't work out as a viable solution. And even China, without a threat to the regime, moved towards social capitalism and away from pure communism (if the term applies).

So, there is a certain and more important component of "freedom and dignity" involved. The person who burned himself in Tunisia (Bouazizi) did so not because he was selling vegetables and didn't have a good job. The police humiliated him and pushed him over the brink. He went to submit a complaint, but a female officer slapped him on the face and made him the object of ridicule in the station (and probably outside it). That was the spark. But the rest of the story isn't about a slap on the face.

It is about a people who are fed up with feeding the coffers of a ruling family that owned 80% of the economy (directly and indirectly), restricted freedoms (of expression and religous as Tunisia was the only country where mosques required a permit to enter and potitical opposition was almost non-existent). They revolted; and the dictator fled.

In Egypt it is the same, the 2005 elections resulted in token opposition in the parliament; but the 2010 elections netted the ruling party 99% of the seats. The opposition decided to hit the streets.

Regarding Iran and the rest of the region, there are points of comparison; but there are points that seem like points of comparison; but are not in reality. At best, the Sunni population of the Middle East treats Iran with guarded suspicion. The reason is that Iran's main objective is a Shia kingdom within the borders of ancient Persia. And the US is a willing helper with handing them Iraq on gold plate.

Finally, the principle and guiding light is to "Let the people choose;" and then respect their choice. If free and fair elections are held today, the people of every nation have the right to govern themselves within their borders as they see fit. And I say, free and fair, on a regular basis; so that people can develop into their democracies or whatever ".....cracies" they see fit.

[Badstench]

Thank you for that perspective, Elrond.

What can I say but... "I agree with you". All people really want is freedom to lead their lives within a fair system.

I try to understand what "fair" means, but I only have my own country and existence to judge by.

But don't get me wrong... New Zealand isn't a paradise for everyone who lives here. Poverty is a matter of degree, and just because some people complain that they're stuck with a cathode tube TV because they can't afford the latest High definition technology doesn't cut it with me. They're not poor.

Families who struggle to put food on the table or can't pay the power bill are the people I sympathise with.

But, New Zealand isn't anywhere close to experiencing civil unrest akin to what happened in Egypt, simply because our government is an elected representative of The People. We put them there, and they're trying their best on our behalf.

But... I have one huge gripe (that might sound banal to inhabitants of countries where life is tougher), and that gripe is about the economics of ITC's - International Trading Commodities.

Food is so expensive these days. Why?

For God's sake, New Zealand is is a small country with one of the highest export quotas of dairy products. We've got milk and cheese and butter coming out our proverbial ears.

But we're paying huge amounts for it at the supermarket. Why?

Supply and demand, and overseas demand is high. It doesn't make financial sense for a company to sell its product cheaply in NZ if it can get better prices internationally, so it sells to the domestic market at the international price.

Bollocks!

This makes me angry, especially when I notice my food bill going up unnecessarily... and...and..

Oh, I should stop now. Friggin shtiffin' urfle grump!

[Badstench]

But now I've got something nice to say about politics.

Specifically, a politician.

And more specifically, Julia Gillard, who is the Prime Minister of Australia.

She recently visited New Zealand and became the very first leader of a foreign country to address our nation from the House of Parliament. She was invited to speak there by our own Prime Minister, John Key, but the invitation wasn't without detractors.

Regardless, she spoke, and everything she said was politaically correct. More than that, everything she said endeared her to New Zealanders. She talked about "mateship", the bond between Australia and New Zealand that exists and will exist for all time to come.

She talked about friendship and common goals, societies and rule of law, togetherness and... get this... sharing a beer.

Good woman, her.

[demojan777]

I started following the Egyptian "Protests", as they were called at the time, at about the half-way point, not being big on news at present as much as I usually am, and what I discovered was fascinating. I discovered that there had been a successful Revolution in Tunisia not long before, and that all across the north of Africa and the Middle East nearly every country was experiencing similar protests.

The reason Egypt had become the focal point is that the Egyptian Government responded with the most oppression and violence, which in turn stoked the flames of resentment that the common people of that country had been holding in for some time to the point that what started as "Protests" turned into another successful Revolution: Egyptian Revolution of 2011 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_Egyptian_protests)

The thing is, where does this go from here? Protests continue across the entire region. Tunisia and Egypt have succeeded in starting to restore the control of their governments to the people after years of quiet dictatorship (dictatorships that many world powers, including the U.S.A., were supporting), and the success of the civil unrest in those countries has to be giving hope to the rest of the revolutionaries in their neighboring countries: 2010–2011 Arab world protests (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010%E2%80%932011_Arab_world_protests), 2011 Iranian protests (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_Iranian_protests).

It's hard for me to have much of an opinion about this, because I am a moderate liberal lower-middle-class American of mixed heritage (English, Irish, Scandinavian, German, and Cherokee in order from highest to lowest percentage) and the civil unrest I've seen in my own country with my own eyes is nothing compared to how scary it must be for people my own age (early 30s) who are living in those countries at this time, and how much different things are.

All I can say is that I count my blessings every day, and that I am happy to be alive in such an exciting time. I hope for the best and expect the worst, and when the worst doesn't happen I am pleasantly surprised. I was VERY happy when I learned that the former President of Egypt stepped down and that the vocal majority that had taken to the streets were victorious as it was something I didn't expect.

Hopefully the flames of democracy will spread across the map just as the flames of dissent have, and leave a land, governed by the people who have burned and bled for their right to control their own destinies, to rise from the ashes after the flames have burned out.

[Elrond]

Thank you for that perspective, Elrond.

What can I say but... "I agree with you". All people really want is freedom to lead their lives within a fair system.

I try to understand what "fair" means, but I only have my own country and existence to judge by.

But don't get me wrong... New Zealand isn't a paradise for everyone who lives here. Poverty is a matter of degree, and just because some people complain that they're stuck with a cathode tube TV because they can't afford the latest High definition technology doesn't cut it with me. They're not poor.

Families who struggle to put food on the table or can't pay the power bill are the people I sympathise with.

But, New Zealand isn't anywhere close to experiencing civil unrest akin to what happened in Egypt, simply because our government is an elected representative of The People. We put them there, and they're trying their best on our behalf.

But... I have one huge gripe (that might sound banal to inhabitants of countries where life is tougher), and that gripe is about the economics of ITC's - International Trading Commodities.

Food is so expensive these days. Why?

For God's sake, New Zealand is is a small country with one of the highest export quotas of dairy products. We've got milk and cheese and butter coming out our proverbial ears.

But we're paying huge amounts for it at the supermarket. Why?

Supply and demand, and overseas demand is high. It doesn't make financial sense for a company to sell its product cheaply in NZ if it can get better prices internationally, so it sells to the domestic market at the international price.

Bollocks!

This makes me angry, especially when I notice my food bill going up unnecessarily... and...and..

Oh, I should stop now. Friggin shtiffin' urfle grump!

Badstench, it is because wheat/grain prices have to be maintained at a certain level. So, even if supply closes the gap on demand; measures kick in to maintain a certain price level (even if it means destruction of the surplus). Anyways, politics is a very dirty business. There are no ethics or morals involved in relations between countries. It is "interests and leverage."

Even when it comes to internal politics, the same applies. Has the number of homeless people in the US hit 40 million yet (not counting the foreclosures)? Last time I checked, there were 50 million uninsured Americans (not including immigrants - legal or illegal); and by US standards the poverty line had nearly 50 million people under it. The cost of the war on Iraq would solve the problems for these 50 million poor, uninsured, and homeless people. Instead, a trillion dollars goes to the pocket of the war lobby (military manufacturers, subcontractors, etc.) and the oil industry (they're mega rich as oil increased from $20 a barrel to 80$ a barrel). And that didn't translate into additional jobs for people; it was pure profit!!! Interests and leverage! Lobbies and corporations rule!