Page 2 of 2

Posted: 17 Apr 2008, 21:08
by nodubmanshouts
ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.
Reminds me of listening to most Cure albums.

Posted: 18 Apr 2008, 11:56
by Pista
:lol: :lol: :lol:

Just "most" Cure albums?

Posted: 20 Apr 2008, 00:34
by Francis
The point of this thread was to re-ignite discussion on a very important issue. You might prefer to stick your head in the sand, or up your arse, but politicians do rule the world. Vested interests are just a distraction.

Posted: 20 Apr 2008, 00:38
by eotunun
And who rules the politicians? Big money. And that already is a global factor.

Posted: 20 Apr 2008, 01:23
by nodubmanshouts
I dunno, I think there must be an easier way to make money than my going into politics... having to risk your career on re-election every few year, loss of privacy, having to suck up to the most despicable people...

I don't doubt money is apart of it, but many politicans are already multi-millionaires; Thatcher, Bushes, Clintons, etc, etc.

I think its more about a desire for power than just money.

Posted: 20 Apr 2008, 12:44
by eotunun
Here in Germany we had an increase of energy prices since the year 2000 of well over 30%.
The majority of our politicians here end up in the advisor's board of those energy providers.
The former chancelor Gerhard Schröder, a social democrat according to his former party membership and member of the 1968 left wing student's riots, now is a top manager of Putin's darling, Gasprom.
Chanceloress Angela Merkel already is advisor for the RWE, the biggest provider for electricity and gas in Germany..
Then there's ex-chancelor Helmut Kohl's silence about the donations his party received for the election campaign. A major arms dealer and weapon industrie's lobbyist is involved there.
There may be easier ways of making money, but for keeping it you should own a few politicians. :wink:

Posted: 21 Apr 2008, 01:42
by nodubmanshouts
There may be easier ways of making money, but for keeping it you should own a few politicians.
:):) Well, I agree with that!

But its interesting to note that inflation alone would causes prices to rise 25% since 2000, so its only a 5% or so raise in real terms.

Of course its interesting to think that maybe the rising energy prices are what caused the inflation... ah, wheels within wheels...

Posted: 21 Apr 2008, 11:51
by eotunun
nodubmanshouts wrote:Of course its interesting to think that maybe the rising energy prices are what caused the inflation... ah, wheels within wheels...
POINT! ;D
The rate of inflation is measured by the observation of the prices of a selection of goods. Thus the decline of the value of money can be measured and thus experts can tell you the value of your fortune.
Now: Those fortune tellers occasionally change the selection of goods they observe. According to what the public is supposed to feel like. :wink:
Winston Churchill wrote:Don't trust statistics you didn't falsify yourself!
:innocent: :wink:

Posted: 22 Apr 2008, 05:29
by nodubmanshouts
Yeah, it makes me laugh (or is that cry?) when I'm told inflation has been under 3% for the last decade, when houses prices around here have doubled in that time.... and house payments are most people's expensive monthly outgoing...

Madness, I tell you, madness.

Posted: 26 Apr 2008, 01:12
by Francis
Interesting points made and accepted. But...

Black man or white woman or run away to a safe Republican vote?

Posted: 04 May 2008, 02:10
by Francis
Any news?

Posted: 04 May 2008, 04:31
by 6FeetOver
...CNN.com, BBC.co.uk, Yahoo.com, etc., etc., ad infinitum, innit? Or am I missing something, here?

Posted: 04 May 2008, 08:08
by nodubmanshouts
nah. Wait until October, then things will get interesting.

Posted: 04 May 2008, 10:14
by markfiend
If McCain wins be very very frightened.

The religious right has made shocking progress with the dominionist agenda during the Bush years, another four Republican years under McCain and we could wake up with the Scudder Interregnum.

Posted: 04 May 2008, 20:14
by sultan2075
markfiend wrote:If McCain wins be very very frightened.

The religious right has made shocking progress with the dominionist agenda during the Bush years, another four Republican years under McCain and we could wake up with the Scudder Interregnum.
Not bloody likely.

The Republican party is deeply divided, and the libertarian/small government/fiscally conservative wing would never go along with something like that. For that matter, neither would the social and religious conservatives, who for the most part view that sort of thing as rather nutty.

For the record, I think that McCain will win the election. The Democrats are doing his work for him during their primary, proving once again, etc, etc. They are absolute incompetents.

Posted: 08 May 2008, 05:21
by nodubmanshouts
Today's update:

Clinton has basically lost... she's run out of campaign money, and so is using her own, and just won't give it up.

Meanwhile, the Republican party is smiling...

Posted: 08 May 2008, 14:31
by sultan2075
nodubmanshouts wrote:Today's update:

Clinton has basically lost... she's run out of campaign money, and so is using her own, and just won't give it up.

Meanwhile, the Republican party is smiling...
She wants to bloody up Obama, I think, so that he's easily defeated by McCain and she can go for the Democratic nomination in 2012. Her campaign has also been spreading rumors among Democratic superdelegates that there is something very bad in his background that will be brought up as an "October surprise" and sink him in the general election.

Posted: 10 May 2008, 03:11
by Francis
K, so Obama's yet to be painted black and Hillary's main appeal is her husband? The Dem's had better get their act together cos the rest of the planet seems to be veering right...

Posted: 10 May 2008, 05:17
by Prescott
Please all, if you watch any movie this year, watch this one: www.zeitgeistmovie.com

And get back to me if anyone has any advice on how I could afford to move to Europe. Although that might not matter soon.

Very depressed, some of the stuff in the movie I already was familiar with, some of it, like the North American Union and the Amero I had no idea.

Posted: 10 May 2008, 15:32
by sultan2075
Prescott wrote:some of it, like the North American Union and the Amero I had no idea.
I'm pretty sure that's been debunked, hasn't it?

Posted: 10 May 2008, 15:52
by Prescott
sultan2075 wrote:
Prescott wrote:some of it, like the North American Union and the Amero I had no idea.
I'm pretty sure that's been debunked, hasn't it?
I'd like to think so, but more and more scholarly articles in reputable magazines are covering "the idea" of it and in that movie I mentioned above, there is footage of a pundit on MSNBC promoting the idea. Now that's MSNBC not, the Onion, mind you.

Posted: 12 May 2008, 02:29
by nodubmanshouts
Please all, if you watch any movie this year, watch this one: www.zeitgeistmovie.com
I heard its very light on facts.... I should take the time to see it to make up my own mind though...
Now that's MSNBC not, the Onion, mind you.
The difference being? :D Seriously though, one problem with our great country is that the US doesn't have real news channels; I normally tune in to BBC to get real news.

Posted: 12 May 2008, 05:07
by Prescott
nodubmanshouts wrote:
Please all, if you watch any movie this year, watch this one: www.zeitgeistmovie.com
I heard its very light on facts.... I should take the time to see it to make up my own mind though...
Now that's MSNBC not, the Onion, mind you.
The difference being? :D Seriously though, one problem with our great country is that the US doesn't have real news channels; I normally tune in to BBC to get real news.
Agreed, I spend plenty of time on bbc.co.uk to be honest. I am skeptical about perhaps 50% of that movie, yet it's definitely worth seeing.

Posted: 24 May 2008, 23:16
by Andy Christ 666
Personally, I reckon a better choice would be.........
Image