|
|
 |
jeremycobert |
+ |
Wednesday, January 5, 2005 at 10:20 PM why does america have to be the worlds insurance company. did we ask for relief funds when florida got crushed by hurricanes ? we are busy trying to kill terrorists, let those euro-trash retards fund the clean up. http://editorial.gettyimages.com/source/search/details_pop.aspx?iid=51896117&cdi=0 —jeremycobert |
|
|
|
|
foob2011 |
+ |
Wednesday, January 5, 2005 at 10:22 PM U.S. government gave $350 million
Japanese government gave $500 million U.S.= an insurance company, yes; but not the biggest —foob2011 |
|
|
|
|
Theo |
+ |
Wednesday, January 5, 2005 at 10:24 PM i know, they got what they deserved for 9/11!!!gosh! —Theo |
|
|
|
|
TortillaFactory |
+ |
Wednesday, January 5, 2005 at 10:27 PM I think Adam explained it best. We give because giving is good for you, and you know if Adam says it it's true. And it's the right thing to do. —TortillaFactory |
|
|
|
|
Retta |
+ |
Wednesday, January 5, 2005 at 10:34 PM Why donate to tsunami relief funds when you can donate to Theo? I mean, come on. Who's really suffering here? Who deserves it more? Did any Indonesians ever write their own Germany or Florida theme song? —Retta |
|
|
|
|
jeremycobert |
+ |
Wednesday, January 5, 2005 at 10:34 PM the us govenment should give 0$ nowhere is it allowed to give this money away under the constitution. u.s. public = ?
japanese public = ? if you smacktards want to give them money then go ahead, but dont use my tax money for it. i gave to 9/11, florida hurricanes but ive had enough of my taxes going to support these crappy countries that are still going to hate us. —jeremycobert |
|
|
|
|
Colin |
+ |
Wednesday, January 5, 2005 at 10:34 PM
Edited Wednesday, January 5, 2005 at 10:35 PM let those euro-trash retards fund the clean up. They are, you isolationist twit. —Colin |
|
|
|
|
Theo |
+ |
Wednesday, January 5, 2005 at 10:36 PM lol, yeah no shit!!! no, for real, those poor people need everything we can send them, feel free to send $$$ you may have sent me to them —Theo |
|
|
|
|
Theo |
+ |
Wednesday, January 5, 2005 at 10:37 PM its not about countries and taxes, its about people —Theo |
|
|
|
|
Colin |
+ |
Wednesday, January 5, 2005 at 10:38 PM BELGIUM: 22 tons of aid from MSF and UNICEF to Sri Lanka. BRITAIN: Plastic sheets, tents to Sri Lanka; 370,000 pounds to EU aid effort; $100,000 to WHO relief effort. CZECH REPUBLIC: Plane to Sri Lanka with drinking water; also aid worth $444,400. EUROPEAN UNION: 3 million euros immediately. FRANCE: Plane, rescue workers and aid to Sri Lanka; 100,000 euros for rescue efforts in Thailand. GERMANY: 1 million euros; disaster relief team sent to Sri Lanka. GREECE: 17 doctors and medical staff. NETHERLANDS: 2 million euros to Red Cross-Red Crescent appeal. SPAIN: 1 million euros; plane with aid and sanitary equipment to Sri Lanka. SWEDEN: Tents and communications equipment to Maldives; $750,000 to global appeal. —Colin |
|
|
|
|
Colin |
+ |
Wednesday, January 5, 2005 at 10:39 PM That data is from this website. It's 8 days old, as well. —Colin |
|
|
|
|
jeremycobert |
+ |
Wednesday, January 5, 2005 at 10:44 PM those poor people need everything we can send them, ? really ? maybe we can send them an early warning system.... oh wait we tried to but they didnt want it.... hmmmm so if one of you ass hats refuse to buy home owners insurance and a tornado knocks your house off its wheels, then i should feel sorry for you and pay for its clean up ? hell no, welcome to capatilism you 3rd world mooks. oh and before you open you pie hole, remember they did refuse some help. i guess hating jews is more important then saving lives.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4130599.stm —jeremycobert |
|
|
|
|
Colin |
+ |
Wednesday, January 5, 2005 at 10:59 PM About this much compassion in our ethnocentric friend. (I'm holding my thumb and forefinger about .3 mm apart.) —Colin |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Colin |
+ |
Wednesday, January 5, 2005 at 11:03 PM Got any more zingers? It was .3 mm and yes I am. All over your mom... —Colin |
|
|
|
|
Colin |
+ |
Wednesday, January 5, 2005 at 11:05 PM You don't really have anything, do you? I mean to support your uncompassionate views. Really. Bush has no trouble getting money to fight his wars. Your argument for the terrorists is out. —Colin |
|
|
|
|
gouranga3221 |
+ |
Wednesday, January 5, 2005 at 11:09 PM
Edited Wednesday, January 5, 2005 at 11:17 PM I'm all for supporting innocent victims, but it pisses me off when they turn LL into a 15 hour pimp-fest for red cross. We get the point. Is there really a need to pimp it so hard? —gouranga3221 |
|
|
|
|
The Pink House |
+ |
Wednesday, January 5, 2005 at 11:15 PM The Canadian Government has pledged to match dollar for dollar any donations made by Canadians. Personally I think that's not only politically smart but also puts the onus on the Canadian public. P —The Pink House |
|
|
|
|
guydudebro |
+ |
Wednesday, January 5, 2005 at 11:16 PM Can we send them Linkin Park? They can do whatever they want with them. Just take them, please. —guydudebro |
|
|
|
|
Stephan |
+ |
Wednesday, January 5, 2005 at 11:17 PM Come on now guys, people are dying. Usually I'm all for the pessimistic attitude, but let's be fair here, help out those less fortunate. —Stephan |
|
|
|
|
jackthatdork |
+ |
Wednesday, January 5, 2005 at 11:18 PM I've had enough of my taxes going to support these crappy countries that are still going to hate us. Yeah - that 10% that is taken out of your minimum-wage paycheck really hurts. —jackthatdork |
|
|
|
|
jeremycobert |
+ |
Wednesday, January 5, 2005 at 11:19 PM im not arguing that we should not give them money because of the overwhelming amount of terrorism in that part of the world. my argument is that we cant buy the love of these people with our $$$, so instead we should use the money to re-invest in american interests. use this money to remove green arrows at all the intersections in cali. hell give this money to any americans, but dont spen tax dollars on them, let private donations help, not federal funds all kidding aside,you still havent convinced me to give these people any of my hard earned jack. —jeremycobert |
|
|
|
|
gouranga3221 |
+ |
Wednesday, January 5, 2005 at 11:20 PM
Edited Wednesday, January 5, 2005 at 11:21 PM Can we send them Linkin Park? They can do whatever they want with them. Just take them, please.
—guydudebro Don't forget to send them hooobershmank. Maybe these flesh traders would like to have leakin puke, and hooobershmank, so they could sell their supple, preppy, white bred hippie asses to a sex merchant of some kind. —gouranga3221 |
|
|
|
|
steve |
+ |
Wednesday, January 5, 2005 at 11:21 PM Charity is a form of intelligence. Stupid people identify very heavily with the ego and hence, think in terms of "me versus you", "my country versus your country", "my team versus your team", etc. Smart people realize that compassion is a universal concept. Stupid people think that compassion is only for "me only", "my family only ", "my country only", etc. Smart people transcend that childish level of ego-identification. —steve |
|
|
|
|
clodhopper |
+ |
Wednesday, January 5, 2005 at 11:28 PM "Charity is a form of intelligence. Stupid people identify very heavily with the ego and hence, think in terms of "me versus you", "my country versus your country", "my team versus your team", etc. Smart people realize that compassion is a universal concept. Stupid people think that compassion is only for "me only", "my family only ", "my country only", etc. Smart people transcend that childish level of ego-identification." I'm sorry, but this is just stupid. Whether or not people selflessly give has nothing to do with intelligence or lack thereof. Yet again, the person who looks out for themselves is demonized, though this time not as an evil person, but as a stupid person. It's no wonder society is a mess. I'm with jeremy here. It's not a lack of compassion on my part, it's just not appropriate for government to take from one person and give to another and have the audacity to call it charity. The American people have proven their extremely generous in helping the less fortunate and I support that insofar as it they don't consider it a duty, but something that personally satisfies them. But of course, what do *I* know, I'm just too childish to transcend looking after my own interest and believing in personal soverignty ahead of living my life for others first. How stupid! —clodhopper |
|
|
|
|
Colin |
+ |
Wednesday, January 5, 2005 at 11:29 PM No one should have to convince you to share your wealth with others. Oddly enough, just this afternoon, I bought a homeless man 2 burritos and 2 tacos. I spent $4.56 and he had a meal. You have it so much better than the people affected by this disaster. You should be trying to convince us why we should NOT give money to help. —Colin |
|
|
|
|
steve |
+ |
Wednesday, January 5, 2005 at 11:33 PM Heavy ego-identification is usually transcended by the age of 9 or 10. But all that aside, what's wrong clodhopper? You've been exceptionally angry lately. (And no, I'm not being sarcastic.) —steve |
|
|
|
|
gouranga3221 |
+ |
Wednesday, January 5, 2005 at 11:40 PM Charity is a form of intelligence. Stupid people identify very heavily with the ego and hence, think in terms of "me versus you", "my country versus your country", "my team versus your team", etc. Smart people realize that compassion is a universal concept. Stupid people think that compassion is only for "me only", "my family only ", "my country only", etc. Smart people transcend that childish level of ego-identification.
—steve This is too simple to be correct. You can't just paint it in black and white like this, draw a line in the charity sand, so to speak, and say "stupid folks here, smart folks there". I'm relatively intelligent, not a genius or anything, but certainly not stupid, and I'm not giving any money to these people. (Not that I identify with cobert or hopper, because I don't)
I couldn't even tell you why I'm not giving, I'm just not. It's not totally an isolationist thing, but it's also not all that compassionate either. That in and of itself does not make me, or someone who holds the same position, stupid. Ask yourself this: Would these people, if the tables were turned and they were in a higher economic position, and we were suffering a disaster and in need, give to us?
I'm not too sure they'd give a shit. It's not always up to us to 'be the bigger man'.
—gouranga3221 |
|
|
|
|
TortillaFactory |
+ |
Wednesday, January 5, 2005 at 11:45 PM Gouranga, you may be right, and I can't convince anyone to give without hope of getting anything back. I just happen to believe that it's the right thing to do. I'd even go so far as to say that it's one of the foundational principles that give life meaning...the fact that we humans, despite all our shortcomings, still have the ability to reach out selflessly. —TortillaFactory |
|
|
|
|
steve |
+ |
Wednesday, January 5, 2005 at 11:47 PM
Edited Wednesday, January 5, 2005 at 11:49 PM Perhaps "smart" and "stupid" are too harsh. However, regarding this: "Ask yourself this: Would these people, if the tables were turned and they were in a higher economic position, and we were suffering a disaster and in need, give to us?
I'm not too sure they'd give a shit." This is exactly what I'm talking about with ego versus non-ego. Ego "gives" with condition -- "I'll do this, but what am I gonna get out of it?" Non-ego "gives" regardless -- It gives without attachment to the outcome. Edited to add: That's funny Liz -- You and I posted at the same time with basically the same sentiment -- You called it "selfless" and I called it "non-ego", but it's the same thing. —steve |
|
|
|
|
Colin |
+ |
Wednesday, January 5, 2005 at 11:51 PM It's not always up to us to 'be the bigger man'. —gouranga3221 At this point, we're not. Australia has given $765 million USD. Just about double what our government pledged. —Colin |
|
|
|
|
gouranga3221 |
+ |
Wednesday, January 5, 2005 at 11:59 PM It's not really about getting something back. I'm not talking about return on investment here, I'm saying, 'if the tables were turned'. Anyone who thinks a charitable donation should have ROI is either stupid, or a prick. If, knowing that they would not help you, were the tables turned, you still give them aid, I say you are better people than I will ever be. —gouranga3221 |
|
|
|
|
gouranga3221 |
+ |
Thursday, January 6, 2005 at 12:02 AM It's not always up to us to 'be the bigger man'. —gouranga3221 At this point, we're not. Australia has given $765 million USD. Just about double what our government pledged.
—Colin I see what you mean, but let's not get bogged down in the gumbo mud of technicalities here.
I didn't mean bigger in the sense of more money than all other pledging nations, I meant bigger in the moral/virtuous sense. —gouranga3221 |
|
|
|
|
Colin |
+ |
Thursday, January 6, 2005 at 12:03 AM Then why do big businesses donate money to anything? To get a tax refund (a return on their investment). Wal-Mart and Pfizer are a couple of the big companies I saw tonight that have donated. Those two do nothing with their money unless it helps them out. —Colin |
|
|
|
|
jeremycobert |
+ |
Thursday, January 6, 2005 at 12:03 AM you can pour as much money as you want into this area, and it may find its way to a few people but the majority of the $$ is going into a corrupt county/region. i would gladly give them $$ if they would actually fix the problem. socialism does not work, it never has. colin can buy homeless people burritos everyday, or he can help this homeless guy fill out an application,so the drunk...er i mean homeless guy can feed himeself. you cant save everyone ! at some point these people will have to take responsability for themselves. yes its sad that people have died, but its also sad that their government refused to buy the early warning systems offered to them, its sad that the same governements did not warn their own people beacuse they didnt want to hurt the tourism trade. its sad that these governments would rather refuse help from israel, then save lives. its all sad. its all sad, and im out of pop-tarts, now thats a tragedy... someone get a collection together and send me more pop-tarts —jeremycobert |
|
|
|
|
TortillaFactory |
+ |
Thursday, January 6, 2005 at 12:04 AM If, knowing that they would not help you, were the tables turned, you still give them aid, I say you are better people than I will ever be. And I say, with more confidence this time, that this is the essence of goodness, at least as far as we can understand it. Most people will probably live their lives only giving to those who would give back to them, but I think there's something greater. —TortillaFactory |
|
|
|
|
gouranga3221 |
+ |
Thursday, January 6, 2005 at 12:06 AM Then why do big businesses donate money to anything? To get a tax refund (a return on their investment).
Wal-Mart and Pfizer are a couple of the big companies I saw tonight that have donated. Those two do nothing with their money unless it helps them out.
—Colin You're busting my balls here, man. Not that I don't have it coming, but still.
I think we can all agree we're speaking about civilian donations in this arena. Money in the range of a grand or less, I would imagine. The business world is different. No one in here has 'Wal-Mart' money to give away. —gouranga3221 |
|
|
|
|
Colin |
+ |
Thursday, January 6, 2005 at 12:09 AM Ha!! That's true. What are those backcountry fucks worth? 80 billion? —Colin |
|
|
|
|
gouranga3221 |
+ |
Thursday, January 6, 2005 at 12:11 AM Who knows, man, who knows. They're probably worth three times what they report. Ya gotta love capatalism, but the green monster does sneak in every now and then, and make me wish I had that kind of scratch. —gouranga3221 |
|
|
|
|
steve |
+ |
Thursday, January 6, 2005 at 12:11 AM All right fine... I'm sending strawberry pop tarts 'cause it was all I could find at this hour. Yeah gouranga -- that's what I was talkin' about -- It's sort of like when people say, "Well, I'm racist towards black people 'cause all the black people at my work are racist towards white people." It doesn't matter if everyone else is racist -- You, yourself aren't racist 'cause you simply know it's wrong. —steve |
|
|
|
|
gendou |
+ |
Thursday, January 6, 2005 at 12:24 AM anyone who is angry about the fact that the US government is using their money to help others should consider a few things: 1. the US government spent more money in one week in Iraq than has pledged thus far to help victims of a natural disaster. why were we wasting $ in Iraq? to "save the people of a merciless dictator". (wether you believe that or not) point #1 is that 350 mil is a small check for the US to write, and we have been "spending money on other people" in most of the wars in this century. (ww1, ww2, vietnam, korea, iraq, etc.) 2. if you have never been to Thailand, India, Indonesia, or Africa you probably dont feel anything when you hear the news about what has happened there. but for those people who have been to a resort in one of these islands, or seen one of these countries, the feeling "Hits home" a little bit more. "steve" said it best: people (americans mostly) are obsessed with "me verses you". WE are all human. the borders are imaginary lines. people who lack the spirit of giving are, as adam put it, 'tards. 3. "why is it the government's job? it doesn't say in the constitution that the government should pay for other people in cases of natural disasters!" quite to the contrary, it is the MAIN GOAL of the government to 'speak for the people' and to help do what the public wants them to do. no, there was no VOTE "how much should the US help Asia?" but you better believe there were public opinion poles. of course bush knows that if he didnt donate it would be BAD FOR THE COUNTRY. bad for our international image, bad for our economy (how much of our shit is made in indonesia? ever check the label on your shoes?) without aid, thousands more people will die from disease, dehydration and hunger. americans dont want to see that. americans dont want to let that happen. the few thoughtless americans who do, ought to have their citizenship revoked for being heartless morons. if Adam Carola was in charge, im sure he would help them. it makes me sad to hear so many people xenophobic isolists speak so coldly about human loss... however, the volume of international help has been uplifting. —gendou |
|
|
|
|
gouranga3221 |
+ |
Thursday, January 6, 2005 at 12:38 AM the borders are imaginary lines -gendou Come on, people now. Smile on your brother... —gouranga3221 |
|
|
|
|
steve |
+ |
Thursday, January 6, 2005 at 12:44 AM Uh oh gouranga -- You're askin' for another fruity love-pile -- I thought you woulda learned your lesson after the last time. *prepares to hug everyone like a hippy* —steve |
|
|
|
|
savethebabies |
+ |
Thursday, January 6, 2005 at 12:46 AM People tend to forget to consider the money that is sent by private American donations will probably dwarf any other countries donations. Yes, those loathsome, religious Christian retards, who really is the scum of the earth for not legalizing dope and bumming our high, opposes abortion and DARES to PASS JUDGEMENT on bad behaviour with their retarded moral values they IMPOSE upon the public and use to brainwash their kids with, they will probably play a big part in the relief effort.
I'm sure it's just a publicity stunt though, fuck them all! Hypocrites!! —savethebabies |
|
|
|
|
savethebabies |
+ |
Thursday, January 6, 2005 at 12:46 AM BTW, most of the victims here are Muslims. I wonder how much Saudi Arabia or Kuwait donated... —savethebabies |
|
|
|
|
gouranga3221 |
+ |
Thursday, January 6, 2005 at 12:47 AM
Edited Thursday, January 6, 2005 at 12:47 AM Uh oh gouranga -- You're askin' for another fruity love-pile -- I thought you woulda learned your lesson after the last time. *prepares to hug everyone like a hippy*
—steve *Puts on American flag bandana and tea-shades*
*Plays beatles 'white' album* Fine, if a love pile it must be, then I am prepared. —gouranga3221 |
|
|
|
|
bguirk |
+ |
Thursday, January 6, 2005 at 12:56 AM Yo Jeremy: May a tsunami/earthquake/flood/hurricane/shitstorm land on your front porch tomorrow. I'm sure you can take care of the cleanup yourself. We make a lot of money off the backs of Indians and SE Asians. Those shoes you're wearing, the toaster you use, the TV you watch--probably all made over there and they were paid next to nothing to make them for you. 300 million is nothing. The US Government spends more on toilet paper and kleenex each year. It's the very least we could do. —bguirk |
|
|
|
|
clodhopper |
+ |
Thursday, January 6, 2005 at 1:01 AM
Edited Thursday, January 6, 2005 at 1:02 AM "No one should have to convince you to share your wealth with others. Oddly enough, just this afternoon, I bought a homeless man 2 burritos and 2 tacos. I spent $4.56 and he had a meal. You have it so much better than the people affected by this disaster. You should be trying to convince us why we should NOT give money to help." How about because some people have priorities of, say, paying their own bills? You absolutely have the burden to convince me to exert any effort in anyway on anything. I'm not saying I'm opposed to helping people who are the victims of natural disasters, but you're treating as a foregone conclusion that I have a duty. That's simply not the case. I also find your story comically cliche...whether you did it or not, I'll never know, but you could have picked an example that didn't sound so blatantly fake. (You also won't be getting any praise from me for doing it.) "Heavy ego-identification is usually transcended by the age of 9 or 10. But all that aside, what's wrong clodhopper? You've been exceptionally angry lately. (And no, I'm not being sarcastic.)" You're not very good at detecting emotions (nor do you really know me, so I'm not sure were you get off coming off as my buddy either...) because when I'm angry and in front of a computer, I make it clearly known. I'm quite calm, but I do get irritated by statements which are presented as truth when they're nowhere near true. "This is exactly what I'm talking about with ego versus non-ego. Ego "gives" with condition -- "I'll do this, but what am I gonna get out of it?" Non-ego "gives" regardless -- It gives without attachment to the outcome." The perhaps is the most absurd conclusion. You're essentially advocating that I expend my efforts/resources/or whatever WITHOUT any rational attachment to the outcome. How is this smart? It's perfectly intelligent and rational to ask "what am I gonna get out of this?" I'm not sure why people seem to think that's bad--or stupid--but it's anything but. "Then why do big businesses donate money to anything? To get a tax refund (a return on their investment). Wal-Mart and Pfizer are a couple of the big companies I saw tonight that have donated. Those two do nothing with their money unless it helps them out." I see nothing wrong with that because there simply isn't anything wrong with it. "yes its sad that people have died, but its also sad that their government refused to buy the early warning systems offered to them, its sad that the same governements did not warn their own people beacuse they didnt want to hurt the tourism trade. its sad that these governments would rather refuse help from israel, then save lives. its all sad." But government never acts in its own self-interest! It always does what's best for the people! It's the solution, not the problem! Never! "If, knowing that they would not help you, were the tables turned, you still give them aid, I say you are better people than I will ever be." I'd say the person is an idiot. The least you're owed when you give someone anything is gratitude. Giving someone something KNOWING they would not give you anything in return isn't admirable, it's idiotic. It's no smarter than the typical Loveline caller who is attached to the abusive boyfriend/husband. But hey, they give to their partner knowing they would not give, so they must be the moral heros of society, right? "quite to the contrary, it is the MAIN GOAL of the government to 'speak for the people' and to help do what the public wants them to do. no, there was no VOTE "how much should the US help Asia?" but you better believe there were public opinion poles. Government isn't run by "poles" it's run by votes and rarely are they the direct will of the people. (We'll put aside the inherent reasons why this isn't actually fair or free for the moment.) Either way, your point is self-defeating: if people were really so supportive of help, why wouldn't they cut out the middleman and simply give money on their own? (the answer is, of course, it's easier to spend other people's money) "of course bush knows that if he didnt donate it would be BAD FOR THE COUNTRY. bad for our international image, bad for our economy (how much of our shit is made in indonesia? ever check the label on your shoes?) without aid, thousands more people will die from disease, dehydration and hunger. americans dont want to see that. americans dont want to let that happen. the few thoughtless americans who do, ought to have their citizenship revoked for being heartless morons. if Adam Carola was in charge, im sure he would help them." Eugh...yeah, I'm an awful American if I simply want control over my money to donate it as I see fit. Revoke my citizenship! I don't care if a thief is Mother goddamned Thersa, it wouldn't give her the right to take from me without consent. This is the moral merkiness society lives in--if morals are an inconveniences, disregard them, the ends ALWAYS justify the means and there are no consequences from that thinking beyond that one situation. The entire problem with this point is how it erronously creates only two positions. One, the helpful people who support government aid to the strongest degree; and two, those who oppose government aid and therefore (here's the gratutious error) must be heartless fucks who don't care about anyone but themselves and just might kick an old woman down while crossing the street. Because, of course, there are only two positions here. It's ignorant views and faulty thinking like that which kill my faith in humanity. —clodhopper |
|
|
|
|
savethebabies |
+ |
Thursday, January 6, 2005 at 1:02 AM Einstein said it's all relative. To us here they may seem like they are paid next-to-nothing. But to them, living in their miserable economy, they are paid quite well. They actually fight over each other to get the jobs we think are so horrible.
I'm not saying it's right, but still... —savethebabies |
|
|
|
|
savethebabies |
+ |
Thursday, January 6, 2005 at 1:03 AM It's ignorant views and faulty thinking like that which kill my faith in humanity. —clodhopper C'mon clod, you never had faith in humanity to begin with. —savethebabies |
|
|
|
|
clodhopper |
+ |
Thursday, January 6, 2005 at 1:06 AM "C'mon clod, you never had faith in humanity to begin with." I once was thinking about something someone told me (I can't remember who or where, but that's not important) I was incredibly pessimistic. I told them in reality I'm not, I'm an idealist who believes that humans can achieve incredible things. When asked how that was possible, I asked if they'd be angry if they someone with incredible potential piss it all away making mistake after mistake. But hey, as long as people keep insisting collectivism is the way, we can all keep our collective suicide notes on standby. —clodhopper |
|
|
|
|
gouranga3221 |
+ |
Thursday, January 6, 2005 at 1:07 AM "If, knowing that they would not help you, were the tables turned, you still give them aid, I say you are better people than I will ever be." -gouranga3221 I'd say the person is an idiot. The least you're owed when you give someone anything is gratitude. Giving someone something KNOWING they would not give you anything in return isn't admirable, it's idiotic. It's no smarter than the typical Loveline caller who is attached to the abusive boyfriend/husband. But hey, they give to their partner knowing they would not give, so they must be the moral heros of society, right?-clodhopper How in the fuck can you call them 'idiots'?!?! They're not stupid for doing it, in fact, it's pretty goddamn noble. Just because we're not all in agreement doesn't make one group idiots, and the other geniuses. Shitty statements like this detract from an otherwise valuable discussion. WTF is your problem?
—gouranga3221 |
|
|
|
|
steve |
+ |
Thursday, January 6, 2005 at 1:12 AM "nor do you really know me, so I'm not sure were you get off coming off as my buddy either." ^ Uh, hello? Angry. Are you saying I should just take a 'fuck you' attitude until people prove themselves to be worthy of knowing? Secondly, I will officially stop viewing you as angry when you make one post that is: a) a joke
b) not a 5,000 word rant arguing about political views and or philosophy. —steve |
|
|
|
|
clodhopper |
+ |
Thursday, January 6, 2005 at 1:18 AM "a) a joke
b) not a 5,000 word rant arguing about political views and or philosophy." Sorry, I only respond to three types of posts. Those are the first two and the third is c) attractive young ladies who stuff themselves in lockers for their own amusement Please repost with at least one of those three themes. —clodhopper |
|
|
|
|
piesore |
+ |
Thursday, January 6, 2005 at 1:25 AM I think there's a miunderstanding of what that part of the world's about, the US supports the Indonesian Army there, and the other places along the coast aren't anti-US by any stretch of the imagination.
No industrialzed nation gives less in terms of their national gross than the US, so we're pretty damn stingy as it is already.
There's a reason for charity, had the French not given us support in the Revolutionary War, we would have lost it. There was a tremendous outpouring of support for the US when 9/11 happened. —piesore |
|
|
|
|
steve |
+ |
Thursday, January 6, 2005 at 1:26 AM O.K., I concede -- that was funny. —steve |
|
|
|
|
clodhopper |
+ |
Thursday, January 6, 2005 at 1:27 AM Now take note Steve, THIS is angry. "How in the fuck can you call them 'idiots'?!?! They're not stupid for doing it, in fact, it's pretty goddamn noble. Just because we're not all in agreement doesn't make one group idiots, and the other geniuses. Shitty statements like this detract from an otherwise valuable discussion. WTF is your problem?" I can easily call them idiots. A person who gives something of great value (giving someone of assistance is a great gift, one I am hestitant to take knowing what it deserves in return) knowing they'll get NOTHING of value in return is a fool. Hell, if you donate to a orphan an Indonesia who will forever appreciate your donation with a simple smile, I can see that being PLENTY good enough because it's the appreciation of someone granting something of value to them. It can be something that simple. You're calling it noble to get your face spit in by an ungrateful bastard who wouldn't appreciate your extremely generous help. That's dumb. Giving knowing you'll get nothing back--not even appreciation, which is all many people ask for, including myself--is a waste and isn't noble at all. (Thank you very much Jesus Christ for spreading that idea.) People who expect something of value without giving anything in return are worthy of nothing. (And no, this in no way contradicts anything I've said thus far.) There's nothing noble about sacrifice--it's stupid. My goal in the world is to increase value (material and immaterial), not give it up. People who advocate sacrifice don't make the world a better place, they lessen the value it has. And gratitious and needless cussing detracts from this otherwise valuable dicussion, not a controversial and blunt point (which I can properly defend, I might add). —clodhopper |
|
|
|
|
piesore |
+ |
Thursday, January 6, 2005 at 1:28 AM "socialism does not work, it never has" The roads you drive on, law enforcement, and public education are all the result of socialism. The New Deal, one of the largest set of social programs ever, played a significant part in getting us out of the Great Depression.
Canada has a much lower national gross than the US, but has an overall higher standard of living, due to things like universal health care, and guaranteed housing and food. —piesore |
|
|
|
|
clodhopper |
+ |
Thursday, January 6, 2005 at 1:30 AM "No industrialzed nation gives less in terms of their national gross than the US, so we're pretty damn stingy as it is already." Their government, no. Their people, yes. American citizens are by far the most generous in the world. Judging American generocity by the government is greatly mistaken. "There's a reason for charity, had the French not given us support in the Revolutionary War, we would have lost it. There was a tremendous outpouring of support for the US when 9/11 happened." That's not charity buddy, that's aligning against the enemy of your enemy for personal political gain. Even if you grant charity is for personal gain, to argue the French were generous with aid because of some goodness in their heart is a crock. Politics aren't nice like that. —clodhopper |
|
|
|
|
clodhopper |
+ |
Thursday, January 6, 2005 at 1:33 AM "The roads you drive on, law enforcement, and public education are all the result of socialism." And every one of them could be provided by the private sector just as well. (The condition of roads where I live is so deplorable that to use roads as an example of socialisms success is quite ironic.) "The New Deal, one of the largest set of social programs ever, played a significant part in getting us out of the Great Depression." No, and I will find the evidence to disprove this myth later. (remind me though) "Canada has a much lower national gross than the US, but has an overall higher standard of living, due to things like universal health care, and guaranteed housing and food." I'm distrustful of such international standards since I discovered what goes into them. For example, in evaluating medical care, one key element is left out--the advancement of medicine. Were that factored in, the United States wouldn't be anywhere near 37th or whatever inaccurate rating its given. —clodhopper |
|
|
|
|
gouranga3221 |
+ |
Thursday, January 6, 2005 at 1:36 AM Clodhopper, I don't know how you can say cussing detracts from this discussion. (Way to take my statement and plug in your own words, BTW, always a sign of great genius) I will prove that swearing HELPS people engage in valuable banter. Rat shit, fat shit, dirty old twat. 69 assholes tied in a knot. Hooray! Lizard shit! Fuck! There. I can almost HEAR the value of this thread rising. :) —gouranga3221 |
|
|
|
|
clodhopper |
+ |
Thursday, January 6, 2005 at 1:39 AM *farts on this thread* Mmmm...if it adds value to an episode of Loveline, it adds eggy value to this dicussion too. Yum. But I plugged in no words to what you said and you haven't shown where I misrepresented anything you said. Correct me, I'll concede I made a mistake, and probably still retain my point anyway. —clodhopper |
|
|
|
|
savethebabies |
+ |
Thursday, January 6, 2005 at 2:08 AM Giving someone something KNOWING they would not give you anything in return isn't admirable, it's idiotic - clod I think we can deduce that clodhopper is the ultimate capitalist. —savethebabies |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Everyone Has Warts |
+ |
Thursday, January 6, 2005 at 2:17 AM yeah, all of your tax money's going over there. probably about .0003 cents. but enough to bitch about, i know. fucking whiners. —Everyone Has Warts |
|
|
|
|
gouranga3221 |
+ |
Thursday, January 6, 2005 at 2:19 AM *Voice of Artie Lange*
*WAHHHHH! .00000031 cents of my tax dollars went to India, WAHHHHHHH!* —gouranga3221 |
|
|
|
|
clodhopper |
+ |
Thursday, January 6, 2005 at 2:26 AM
Edited Thursday, January 6, 2005 at 2:27 AM As I said earlier, principles and morality go out the window when it's convenient. It's not about the money, it's about not being able to have what is mine and THEN donate it if I see fit (and more than fractions of a cent too). —clodhopper |
|
|
|
|
Blitzen |
+ |
Thursday, January 6, 2005 at 2:42 AM Seriously, 150,000 people have died! Can you guys even call yourself human? I totally hear your points on the money, but I dont hear any argument against the sum of money we've spent (or are borrowing to spend) in Iraq (over 2 BILLION, yes BILLION!) And I said Iraq, NOT the terrorists! —Blitzen |
|
|
|
|
clodhopper |
+ |
Thursday, January 6, 2005 at 2:49 AM
Edited Thursday, January 6, 2005 at 2:52 AM Except there's that part where I don't oppose giving assistance to people who are victim, only that it would be each person's individual choice. As far as I can see, only that Jeremy guy opposes it and I don't totally agree with his reasons (aside from that it shouldn't be done by the government). And the fact money has been blown trying to rebuild Iraq is not a counterpoint: I'm not fan of that either. (The fact is hasn't been mentioned is because it's not related to the topic.) If you'd like to discuss the folly of nation building and imposing democracy, you can start another thread and I'll make a post or two. —clodhopper |
|
|
|
|
ZT |
+ |
Thursday, January 6, 2005 at 5:20 AM jeremy, clodhopper -- I'll see you in hell. —ZT |
|
|
|
|
nvgoddess |
+ |
Thursday, January 6, 2005 at 11:05 AM I' m soooo depressed. I thought, given the fact that we were all coming from such relatively priveleged backgrounds (granted we may not literally be millionaires, but we have access to the Internet and enough cash for Christmas presents and trips to Loveline - no offense, Theo) that we could spare enough compassion to do something constructive with it. I'm actually, seriously offended right now. Like they said last night, $10 bucks will do - give up your Starbuck's Frappucino for a couple days, for crying out loud. —nvgoddess |
|
|
|
|
Dark Laith |
+ |
Thursday, January 6, 2005 at 11:57 AM If I had a job, i would totally donate. But I don't... —Dark Laith |
|
|
|
|
The Pink House |
+ |
Thursday, January 6, 2005 at 12:40 PM "If I had a job, i would totally donate. But I don't..."
I don't have a job, but I scrapped together $7.00. It's not much but it's something. Plus I know that my $7.00 will actually become $14.00.
P —The Pink House |
|
|
|
|
clodhopper |
+ |
Thursday, January 6, 2005 at 3:36 PM "I' m soooo depressed. I thought, given the fact that we were all coming from such relatively priveleged backgrounds (granted we may not literally be millionaires, but we have access to the Internet and enough cash for Christmas presents and trips to Loveline - no offense, Theo) that we could spare enough compassion to do something constructive with it. I'm actually, seriously offended right now. Like they said last night, $10 bucks will do - give up your Starbuck's Frappucino for a couple days, for crying out loud." Uggg...I give up. People don't even understand what I'm saying. Be offended at your own misconception all you want, there's no point to constantly correcting people when they just don't care. —clodhopper |
|
|
|
|
maxPOWER |
+ |
Thursday, January 6, 2005 at 4:50 PM i think of the good side: many poor people are no longer suffering and wont b alive to crap out more kids —maxPOWER |
|
|
|
|
gouranga3221 |
+ |
Thursday, January 6, 2005 at 5:35 PM "I' m soooo depressed. I thought, given the fact that we were all coming from such relatively priveleged backgrounds (granted we may not literally be millionaires, but we have access to the Internet and enough cash for Christmas presents and trips to Loveline - no offense, Theo) that we could spare enough compassion to do something constructive with it. I'm actually, seriously offended right now. Like they said last night, $10 bucks will do - give up your Starbuck's Frappucino for a couple days, for crying out loud."
This is melodramatic poppy-cock. Cry me a river liberal.
Oh, and Clodhopper, Jeremy, and ZT, I'll see all three of you in hell :)
—gouranga3221 |
|
|
|
|
clodhopper |
+ |
Thursday, January 6, 2005 at 5:37 PM
Edited Thursday, January 6, 2005 at 5:37 PM Hey, Hell will be cool. Adam will be there and Westwood None will install a ISDN line down there so we can be on the show every night! I can't wait!! And I fucking hate frapaccinos. Who drinks that shit? —clodhopper |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
gouranga3221 |
+ |
Thursday, January 6, 2005 at 5:40 PM I don't go to Starfuck's, ever, anyway. It is for yellow bellied yuppies. I drink only Folger's, made at 2x full strength. —gouranga3221 |
|
|
|
|
clodhopper |
+ |
Thursday, January 6, 2005 at 5:42 PM Full strength...sexy. I like you. I'll let you come over and fuck my sister! —clodhopper |
|
|
|
|
ZT |
+ |
Thursday, January 6, 2005 at 7:06 PM Agony. —ZT |
|
|
|
|
gouranga3221 |
+ |
Thursday, January 6, 2005 at 7:14 PM Agony? Is that in regard to coffee? Coffee is a wonderful thing, giver of life, provider of energy, stabilizer of rabid moods. If I had a religion, it would be called coffalcolistics, the lifelong dedication to coffee and alcohol. —gouranga3221 |
|
|
|
|
Muppet |
+ |
Thursday, January 6, 2005 at 7:55 PM No. agony is nailing his sister. —Muppet |
|
|
|
|
ZT |
+ |
Thursday, January 6, 2005 at 11:36 PM Agony is reading this thread. —ZT |
|
|
|
|