|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
joe_doufu
Joined: 09 May 2005
Location: Elsewhere
|
 Posted: Sun Dec 18, 2005 4:52 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| Satori wrote: |
| joe_doufu wrote: |
| Clinton is the #1 reason why Gore and Kerry lost their elections. Americans would rather have a bumbling but honest chimp than a sneaking weasel. |
No, post scandel, and through to the end of his presidency he had very high approval ratings. Normal people forgot about it, they never thought it was important in the first place. Only right wing nut jobs wanted to keep talking about it. |
It has nothing to do with the scandal. Clinton was a liar, and Gore and Kerry have ineptly tried to copy him. Clinton won the election because he seemed to have a vision and a message - he really was going to change things, make life better for Americans. Post-Clinton, the Democrats have tried to field boring, unexceptional, moderate candidates who they think won't attract criticism. Clinton had guts and people voted for him, but we all found out he was totally bluffing, had no loyalty to his campaign promises. I think its going to be hard for the Democrats to throw off the mantle of lying and weaselry. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 18, 2005 5:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Two of Bush's campaign promises were to 'unite' the country and do something about anti-Americanism abroad. Do you feel he has kept these promises?
Clinton a great president? No. An adequate president who left office with the country in better shape than when he came in to office? Yes. Most definitely yes.
I think it is Suetonius who said the Emperor Tiberius chose Caligula to follow him so that he (Tiberius) would look better in comparison. On the same principle, every day Clinton looks better and better. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
joe_doufu
Joined: 09 May 2005
Location: Elsewhere
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 18, 2005 5:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Ya-ta Boy wrote: |
Two of Bush's campaign promises were to 'unite' the country and do something about anti-Americanism abroad. Do you feel he has kept these promises? |
Yup. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
seethetraffic
Joined: 22 Nov 2005
Location: Seoul
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 18, 2005 7:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| joe_doufu wrote: |
| seethetraffic wrote: |
| Many have tried to discount Bill Clinton's effect by pointing to the decline which began before he left office. I submit that the decline occured not because of his leadership. The economy began to tank once it began sinking in that he was leaving. He couldn't be re-elected! |
Not really. Did you ever get a chance to work in the dot-com business? The economy tanked because everybody and his brother was investing their savings in a bunch of ridiculous companies who weren't making profits and had no plan to. It was mass stupidity, or irrational exuberance... |
You can call a booming economy under Clinton anything and everything besides a booming economy but it was still a booming economy. Those dot-coms were not overvalued so long as people were willing to pay the going price. The value of a thing is what it will fetch at any given time. The value of some dot-coms went down when it was clear that Clinton's leadership had to end (due to term limits). But it is clear that under his leadership, tchnology-laden stocks found their footing and many survived.
Joe, I noticed in one of your other posts that you favor a benevolent dictatorship. In other posts you seem to support capitalism and free-markets. Perhaps there are instances in recent history where the two have gone temporarily, hand-in-hand but they are temporary exceptions and probably the best those uneducated populations can muster.
In a good free-market society, people have individual rights. Dictatorships, like communism have strong central authorities that are antithesis to any individual's prosperity. Property rights are paramount in capitalism but an individual's "property" goes beyond just his car, his house and his money. A person's intellectual property and his "freedom to choose" must be sustained or we will denigrate into societies that aspire to communist-like structures.
Clinton loved people. He loved meeting them and shaking their hands and touching them. Reagan was the same and the USA thrived under both Presidents. Bush has little regard for people and is right up your alley in terms of a benevolent dictator. The economy has suffered under him. If only he had more power, huh Joe? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
joe_doufu
Joined: 09 May 2005
Location: Elsewhere
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 18, 2005 7:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| seethetraffic wrote: |
Joe, I noticed in one of your other posts that you favor a benevolent dictatorship. In other posts you seem to support capitalism and free-markets. Perhaps there are instances in recent history where the two have gone temporarily, hand-in-hand but they are temporary exceptions and probably the best those uneducated populations can muster.
In a good free-market society, people have individual rights. Dictatorships, like communism have strong central authorities that are antithesis to any individual's prosperity. Property rights are paramount in capitalism... |
Looks like somebody needs to go back to school. I recommend Fareed Zakaria's book, "The Future of Freedom". Puts into perspective the conflict between freedom and government... like it or not, democracy is a government, that makes it the opposite of freedom. Singapore and Hong Kong are two example of countries that have freedom, including economic freedom, but little democracy. Nazi Germany was an example of a country that embraced democracy but not freedom. You tell me which one you'd prefer to live in... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
seethetraffic
Joined: 22 Nov 2005
Location: Seoul
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 18, 2005 7:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| joe_doufu wrote: |
| seethetraffic wrote: |
Joe, I noticed in one of your other posts that you favor a benevolent dictatorship. In other posts you seem to support capitalism and free-markets. Perhaps there are instances in recent history where the two have gone temporarily, hand-in-hand but they are temporary exceptions and probably the best those uneducated populations can muster.
In a good free-market society, people have individual rights. Dictatorships, like communism have strong central authorities that are antithesis to any individual's prosperity. Property rights are paramount in capitalism... |
Looks like somebody needs to go back to school. I recommend Fareed Zakaria's book, "The Future of Freedom". Puts into perspective the conflict between freedom and government... like it or not, democracy is a government, that makes it the opposite of freedom. Singapore and Hong Kong are two example of countries that have freedom, including economic freedom, but little democracy. Nazi Germany was an example of a country that embraced democracy but not freedom. You tell me which one you'd prefer to live in... |
Neither. The grass is not greener in Honk Kong and its not in Singapore. The people in Hitler's germany didn't embrace democracy they embraced group power and perished where they should have sought individual rights. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mithridates
Joined: 03 Mar 2003
Location: President's office, Korean Space Agency
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 18, 2005 7:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| joe_doufu wrote: |
| seethetraffic wrote: |
Joe, I noticed in one of your other posts that you favor a benevolent dictatorship. In other posts you seem to support capitalism and free-markets. Perhaps there are instances in recent history where the two have gone temporarily, hand-in-hand but they are temporary exceptions and probably the best those uneducated populations can muster.
In a good free-market society, people have individual rights. Dictatorships, like communism have strong central authorities that are antithesis to any individual's prosperity. Property rights are paramount in capitalism... |
Looks like somebody needs to go back to school. I recommend Fareed Zakaria's book, "The Future of Freedom". Puts into perspective the conflict between freedom and government... like it or not, democracy is a government, that makes it the opposite of freedom. Singapore and Hong Kong are two example of countries that have freedom, including economic freedom, but little democracy. Nazi Germany was an example of a country that embraced democracy |
No.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reichsrat_%28Germany%29
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gleichschaltung |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
seethetraffic
Joined: 22 Nov 2005
Location: Seoul
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 18, 2005 7:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mithridates wrote: |
| joe_doufu wrote: |
| seethetraffic wrote: |
Joe, I noticed in one of your other posts that you favor a benevolent dictatorship. In other posts you seem to support capitalism and free-markets. Perhaps there are instances in recent history where the two have gone temporarily, hand-in-hand but they are temporary exceptions and probably the best those uneducated populations can muster.
In a good free-market society, people have individual rights. Dictatorships, like communism have strong central authorities that are antithesis to any individual's prosperity. Property rights are paramount in capitalism... |
Looks like somebody needs to go back to school. I recommend Fareed Zakaria's book, "The Future of Freedom". Puts into perspective the conflict between freedom and government... like it or not, democracy is a government, that makes it the opposite of freedom. Singapore and Hong Kong are two example of countries that have freedom, including economic freedom, but little democracy. Nazi Germany was an example of a country that embraced democracy |
No.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reichsrat_%28Germany%29
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gleichschaltung |
good links, mithridates |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
seethetraffic
Joined: 22 Nov 2005
Location: Seoul
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 18, 2005 7:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| joe_doufu wrote: |
| seethetraffic wrote: |
Joe, I noticed in one of your other posts that you favor a benevolent dictatorship. In other posts you seem to support capitalism and free-markets. Perhaps there are instances in recent history where the two have gone temporarily, hand-in-hand but they are temporary exceptions and probably the best those uneducated populations can muster.
In a good free-market society, people have individual rights. Dictatorships, like communism have strong central authorities that are antithesis to any individual's prosperity. Property rights are paramount in capitalism... |
Looks like somebody needs to go back to school. I recommend Fareed Zakaria's book, "The Future of Freedom". Puts into perspective the conflict between freedom and government... like it or not, democracy is a government, that makes it the opposite of freedom. Singapore and Hong Kong are two example of countries that have freedom, including economic freedom, but little democracy. Nazi Germany was an example of a country that embraced democracy but not freedom. You tell me which one you'd prefer to live in... |
If you say democracy=government=no freedom, then how can you say that a benevolent dictatorship ( which would be even more government) wouldn't offer even less freedom??? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 18, 2005 8:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I hope to that great marshmallow in the sky that you are joking. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
joe_doufu
Joined: 09 May 2005
Location: Elsewhere
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 18, 2005 8:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| seethetraffic wrote: |
| If you say democracy=government=no freedom, then how can you say that a benevolent dictatorship ( which would be even more government) wouldn't offer even less freedom??? |
If that was the equation, how would anybody have ever written an entire book about it?
The US works because of it's fundamental document -- the Bill Of Rights, I mean, not the Constitution -- which serves to protect the people from the government. Singapore and Hong Kong are successful because they've protected economic freedom in their own ways. Hitler was democratically elected, as were many of the most murderous dictators in Africa's recent history, but that doesn't ensure any protection of economic or personal liberty. Which is not to say that anarchy works, either. You need a balance between government and the protection of freedom, and democracy alone is no guarantee of that.
By the way, I'm not going to address the nonsensical assumptions you made in your post. You may wish to thank me. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
seethetraffic
Joined: 22 Nov 2005
Location: Seoul
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 18, 2005 8:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| joe_doufu wrote: |
| seethetraffic wrote: |
| If you say democracy=government=no freedom, then how can you say that a benevolent dictatorship ( which would be even more government) wouldn't offer even less freedom??? |
If that was the equation, how would anybody have ever written an entire book about it?
The US works because of it's fundamental document -- the Bill Of Rights, I mean, not the Constitution -- which serves to protect the people from the government. Singapore and Hong Kong are successful because they've protected economic freedom in their own ways. Hitler was democratically elected, as were many of the most murderous dictators in Africa's recent history, but that doesn't ensure any protection of economic or personal liberty. Which is not to say that anarchy works, either. You need a balance between government and the protection of freedom, and democracy alone is no guarantee of that.
By the way, I'm not going to address the nonsensical assumptions you made in your post. You may wish to thank me. |
Au contraire. I was asking you to address your own nonsensical assumptions and you side-stepped them and changed the subject. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
joe_doufu
Joined: 09 May 2005
Location: Elsewhere
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 18, 2005 8:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| seethetraffic wrote: |
| joe_doufu wrote: |
| seethetraffic wrote: |
| If you say democracy=government=no freedom, then how can you say that a benevolent dictatorship ( which would be even more government) wouldn't offer even less freedom??? |
By the way, I'm not going to address the nonsensical assumptions you made in your post. You may wish to thank me. |
Au contraire. I was asking you to address your own nonsensical assumptions and you side-stepped them and changed the subject. |
OK, first look up the word "benevolent" in a dictionary.
Then please try to explain to me how "dictatorship" = "more government" than "democracy". Are you saying that the US, for example, has much less government than for example Hong Kong? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
seethetraffic
Joined: 22 Nov 2005
Location: Seoul
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 18, 2005 8:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| joe_doufu wrote: |
| seethetraffic wrote: |
| joe_doufu wrote: |
| seethetraffic wrote: |
| If you say democracy=government=no freedom, then how can you say that a benevolent dictatorship ( which would be even more government) wouldn't offer even less freedom??? |
By the way, I'm not going to address the nonsensical assumptions you made in your post. You may wish to thank me. |
Au contraire. I was asking you to address your own nonsensical assumptions and you side-stepped them and changed the subject. |
OK, first look up the word "benevolent" in a dictionary.
Then please try to explain to me how "dictatorship" = "more government" than "democracy". Are you saying that the US, for example, has much less government than for example Hong Kong? |
China is Hong Kong's government. Does China have more "government" than the USA? Yes. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
joe_doufu
Joined: 09 May 2005
Location: Elsewhere
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 18, 2005 8:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| seethetraffic wrote: |
| China is Hong Kong's government. Does China have more "government" than the USA? Yes. |
Are you sure? Back that up with a link please. I would bet you a shiny baek-won that the US government is bigger. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
