|
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 |
The Bobster
Joined: 15 Jan 2003
|
 Posted: Mon Sep 10, 2007 11:51 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| Ya-ta Boy wrote: |
I think I can go along with your foreign policy without much trouble, but what about the truly important things like DOMESTIC policy.
What issues do you see and what are your plans to repair the 27 years worth of Republican damage? |
Thankfully, I'm not really running for office. Aside from a couple of months, I haven't been back in The States very much since '99. The few times I have, since, 9/11, it all seems like a very weird place. I'm both grateful and full of regret not to have experienced that pain along with the rest of my neighbors.
In my brighter moments, I think it gives me a bit of objectivity the rest of America might not have - then again, there's a deep shared emotion they all have that I do not, and that separates me from the people back home ...
Domestic policy? EVERYONE should be able to afford a doctor, and no one needs to die in America because they can't. That's a start.
Next : Any job any person works at pays them enough to eat and pay the rent, and then maybe buy a beer on the weekend. These are two or three small things to ask for citizens of the richest country Planet Earth has yet paid host to.
Damn. Am I really out of line for asking for such small things as these? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
cbclark4
Joined: 20 Aug 2006
Location: Masan
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 10, 2007 9:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| The Bobster wrote: |
| cbclark4 wrote: |
| I would also like to note that my platform has ten Planks, while my opponent has only 7. |
I recall writing the number 8 for the last one of mine, and when I look, several of yours could be combined. Anyway, I was shooting for quality rather than quantity. I think I got what I was aiming for.
Anyway, it looks like we agree more than we disagree, so calling me your "Opponent" is just a little bit precious. Which is cool, if it's intended as irony. I like irony.
Whenever I hear the word "Caliphate" I think of fringe conspiracy dudes. Bush Lite has never uttered the word, to my knowledge, nor has Rumsfeld, Rice, Wolfowitz or Gonzalea. It's a boogeyman, what I'm thinking. |
I think it's quite shameful that you have no Cuba policy. Just another indication of your lack of Foreign Relations skills.
Please Davesters I urge you to come forward with your support.
I am asking for your kind consideration in the upcoming non-office election.
Yes you can ignore the "Caliphate" and the reality that their will be two opposing Caliphs, one in Damascus the other in Tehran. I have this on authority of a well known but unnamed channel. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
thepeel
Joined: 08 Aug 2004
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 10, 2007 9:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
My two cents:
1) The baby idea is nonsnese. Besides, it ain't Westerners that are having the kids...
2) End the war on drugs. End it now. Release the drug prisoners. Move towards a rehabilitation/harm reduction model.
I'm a one-issue dude. I will vote for any party that has as policy the ending of the war on drugs. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Bobster
Joined: 15 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 13, 2007 7:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
| BJWD wrote: |
My two cents:
1) The baby idea is nonsnese. Besides, it ain't Westerners that are having the kids... |
Westerners DO produce a far larger impact on the environment, though. About 30 years ago, I recall some population expert - maybe Paul Ehrlich, but don't bank on that - saying that the average American consumes resources at the same rate as 5 Indians and a dog ... that's about to change, of course, as more and more Indians (and Chinese) buy cars and want to live like Americans have since the mid-20th sentury. Too many people, that's what I'm saying.
Another thing. Ever consider, even to own a bicycle I need a license, and to drive a car I have to prove to someone in some sort of authority that I know how - but any idiot, even convicted criminals, are allowed to create new human life any time they want. Am I the only one who seems something odd about that?
| Quote: |
| 2) End the war on drugs. End it now. Release the drug prisoners. Move towards a rehabilitation/harm reduction model. |
This is wise and I've always agreed with it. There's also a racism angle, because people of color are incarcerated for this a staggeringly higher percentage of the time, and for the same infractions.
Last edited by The Bobster on Mon Sep 17, 2007 9:03 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 13, 2007 1:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| The Bobster wrote: |
| BJWD wrote: |
My two cents:
1) The baby idea is nonsnese. Besides, it ain't Westerners that are having the kids... |
Westerners DO produce a far larger impact on the environment, though. About 30 years ago, I recall some population expert - maybe Paul Ehrlich, but don't bank on that - saying that average American consumes resources at the same rate as 5 Indians and a dog ... that's about to change, of course, as more and more Indian (and Chinese) buy cars and want to live like Americans have since the mid-20th sentury. Too many people, that's what I'm saying. |
So the issue is, people, Westerners in particular, consume too much. I'm with you so far.
Then you say, Indians and Chinese more and more aspire to live like Americans, who are Westerners, who consume too much. Okay, still with you.
But then you say, the solution is for people to have less children. You've lost me.
First of all, you haven't considered the impact of not having enough children on a country. Second of all, you have not addressed the obvious solution, people should try to consume less! Third of all, you admit that Westerners are not the ones having so many children, its the Indians, but that its the Westerners who need to change their conduct???
| Quote: |
Another thing. Ever consider, even to own a bicycle I need a license, and to drive a car I have to prove to someone in some sort of authority that I know how - but any idiot, even convicted criminals, are allowed to create new human life any time they want. Am I the only one who seems something odd about that?
|
I love the way you phrased that. How about I amend it a bit.
'Ever consider, even to own a bicycle I need a license...but any idiot is allowed to have sex whenever they want. Am I the only one who thinks there is something odd about that?'
I mean, we have to have sex to create new human life. Let's ban sex! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 13, 2007 1:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Whoa, there boy.
I want to amend your amendment:
Let's ban sex for ugly people and stupid people. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 13, 2007 2:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Ya-ta Boy wrote: |
Whoa, there boy.
I want to amend your amendment:
Let's ban sex for ugly people and stupid people. |
Ah, okay. A sex license. Is that better? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Bobster
Joined: 15 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 13, 2007 2:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Ya-ta Boy wrote: |
| Let's ban sex for ugly people and stupid people. |
ouch that would leave both of us without nookie, Ta-ta ... um, I'll leave it for others to decide, between the two of us, who is ugly and who who is stupid, or whether we are both ...
It's the modern world, of course, and there are numerous ways that babies can be prevented, even without invasive medical procedures. We all know this.
I just sort of think the planet as a whole would be better off with half as many people, and it will be a LOT worse off with twice as many people. I keep mulling this notion over and I see nothing wong with it, and a lot that is right.
Everybody out there who is married : HAVE JUST ONE KID!
I'm asking politely.
Last edited by The Bobster on Mon Sep 17, 2007 9:20 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 13, 2007 3:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| ouch that would leave both of us without nookie, |
I'm sure you are just speaking for yourself.
I do agree there are too many people for the kind of economy people seem to want to have. Perpetual consumerism is probably not a sustainable lifestyle in the long run.
The ironic thing is that the most effective birth control seems to be wealth. All the wealthy countries have trouble with declining birth rates. Even Augustus Ceasar had trouble with that. West Europeans and East Asians are having serious problems with it now. The fact of aging populations puts pressure on for opening borders to encourage immigration and the resulting problems that produces. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cbclark4
Joined: 20 Aug 2006
Location: Masan
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 13, 2007 6:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
OK on the whole sex issue.
I will not in any way restrict the rights of a free people to excercise the
right to sex in form shape or manner providing it does not interfer with
the rights of others. This is similar to the 'what adults do behind close
doors is no one elses business' philosophy.
Restricting sex is stoopid. Sex is wonderful. Lack of sex leads to
depression.
Let's face it have you ever met anyone who was getting it 3 times a day
that was depressed. No of course not.
So compare my "Sex Plank" to that of my apponent.
Now of course his anti-sex policy is some kind of attempt at population
control. Now I know you folks didn't just fall of the turnip truck, and
neither did I.
Here is the answer to population control. Space Based Communities,
specialized at first, low gravity retirement communities complete with
swimming pools, shuffle board and bingo.
The low gravity will lessen the impact of aging. Think back to the
booming of Florida the selling point was the warmth and it's effects on
aging.
Look at Florida today, a world of of ederly people with a whole
infrastructure built around them, with all kinds of complimentary industry,
entertainment, fine dining, hospitals, rehab centers, it's wonderful.
Industry follows money, old people have money. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cbclark4
Joined: 20 Aug 2006
Location: Masan
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 13, 2007 6:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Ya-ta Boy wrote: |
| ....The fact of aging populations puts pressure on for opening borders to encourage immigration and the resulting problems that produces. |
Exactly my point, the immigrants would be following the money, the aging population moves to space the immigrants follow to serve the elderly. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Bobster
Joined: 15 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 14, 2007 11:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
| cbclark4 wrote: |
| Now of course his anti-sex policy is some kind of attempt at population control. |
Kuros is the one wants to ban sex. Me, I just want half as many babies. I thought I was pretty clear about that.
A much older, though not much wiser man than I : "Let copulation thrive! I shall pardon that man's life. Thou shalt not die. Die for adultery? No. The gilded wren does lecher in my sight ... " (Some guy named Bill, in King Lear, of course.)
Can't have too much sex. Can have too many babies, though.
Kuros' argument rests on what has been experienced about an economic system that thrives on constant growth, regardless of the cost or the limits placed on it by the real world. Economic systems serve people, not the other way around - if this one doesn't work for us, our challenge is to modify it or find another one, before we choke ourselves to death.
Not talking about socialism, by the way. There are other ideas out there, and more that haven't been thought of yet. We have to start thinking. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 14, 2007 1:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| The Bobster wrote: |
| cbclark4 wrote: |
| Now of course his anti-sex policy is some kind of attempt at population control. |
Kuros is the one wants to ban sex. Me, I just want half as many babies. I thought I was pretty clear about that. |
Nobody reasonable can read my post above and assert that I was seriously advocating a ban on sex.
I just wanted to show the regulation of priorities in The Bobster's logic. Ban/regulate new life? Yes, our duty to the environment makes it necessary. Ban/regulate a form of pleasure? Oh, hell no!
| The Bobster wrote: |
Kuros' argument rests on what has been experienced about an economic system that thrives on constant growth, regardless of the cost or the limits placed on it by the real world. Economic systems serve people, not the other way around - if this one doesn't work for us, our challenge is to modify it or find another one, before we choke ourselves to death.
Not talking about socialism, by the way. There are other ideas out there, and more that haven't been thought of yet. We have to start thinking. |
Right, we do have to start thinking, because your idea #8 is as terrible as your idea #4 is noble.
| The Bobster wrote: |
| #4 Develop and encourage EVERY source of energy that does NOT rely on oil. I'm talkin' wind, geothermal, tidal, hell, even nuclear plants. ANYthing that is not oil or coal. |
The assumption in my argument is that technological advance makes things formerly only conceived of in Sci-Fi novels 40 years ago a reality today. Technological innovation is progressing at an ever increasing rate.
However, how old are the habits by which we pollute our environment most? We have relied on burning fossil fuels since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution. For roughly 200 years, we have continued to pump soot and waste into the atmosphere. Only in the last 25 years or so has it dawned on us that this could affect us negatively. Only in the past few years have we had persuasive and convincing evidence meeting a reasonable standard that it is going to affect us negatively.
We have not even begun to fight with technological advance and change. But the Bobster wants to create fewer scientists and make the next generation more impotent in their numbers to carry the environmental revolution through.
The Bobster is ever the true and blue old-fashioned liberal, one who can remember the 60s and probably took part in the revolution. I do not deny that there was a revolution, indeed, I embrace it and celebrate many of the legacies of the 60s. But does the Bobster realize that the power of his generation, the baby boomers, that 'bumper-crop' generation, was as much fueled by their demographic numbers as by their passion and conviction? Namely, doe he realize that the size of his generation gave it the strength and power to change America and even touch the entire world?
Apparently not. The Bobster's generation is aging now. Nothing wrong with that, but it needs to be discussed. The Bobster will not be able to work forever, and at some point he will ask us to take care of him. We will oblige, because the Bobster's generation raised us and took care of us! However, it will be a little harder for us financially to care for the Bobster's generation, because there are fewer of us and more of them than there were in the past few decades compared to The Bobster's generation and his parents' generation. Here's some helpful graphs:
Aging population
America's burden of public beneficiary v. private worker
The problem is not the greying West and East, but the growing South.
Economic growth already directly correlates with decreased fertility rate
View Google Gapminder here |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Bobster
Joined: 15 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 28, 2007 7:50 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Kuros wrote: |
| But the Bobster wants to create fewer scientists and make the next generation more impotent in their numbers to carry the environmental revolution through. |
Fewer people does not mean fewer scientists, or less science. It means fewer natural resources will be consumed, and less real estate required for humans. The world does not get bigger to provide for larger numbers of people. Species are becoming extinct at a ridiculous rate, and when they are gone, they will not be back.
| Quote: |
| The Bobster is ever the true and blue old-fashioned liberal, one who can remember the 60s and probably took part in the revolution. |
Irrelevent, of course.
| Quote: |
| But does the Bobster realize that the power of his generation, the baby boomers, that 'bumper-crop' generation, was as much fueled by their demographic numbers as by their passion and conviction? Namely, doe he realize that the size of his generation gave it the strength and power to change America and even touch the entire world? |
Not a boomer, not as old as you seem to think, but all of this is also not germane to the question of where raw materials and natural resources come from after they have been depleted and destroyed.
| Quote: |
| The Bobster will not be able to work forever, and at some point he will ask us to take care of him. |
Wrong again. Not paying into the American social security system, thank you very much, due to living abroad, so if I do go back to America I'll have no contributions to base any stipend on. Guess I'm on my own. (And it is a flaw in the system, as we all know, that social secuirity contributions are sent to into the general fund rather than set aside and protected from being used to build misiles for the latest war - THAT's what is causing the Social Insecurity mess that's looking.)
What you seem to be saying is that we need to have more babies so they will work and contribute $ to people who have retired - what will happen when THOSE kids get old enough to retire? Well, we'll need more babies, I guess. Sounds like the snake eating its own tail, seems to me ... snake keeps on munching like that, soon he'll be chowing on his own stomache. That's the real world, you know. |
|
| 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
