Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers

Lloyd, is this really you in costume? This kind of post ought to make you
jump for joy.

 

Good call, you're right.

True. Very good points. Having said that, I don't think that a
country like Mexico will *ever* be able to support a US size economy,
because there isn't enough fresh water available there to do so. Look
at Australia - similar size geographically to the US, but with much
less fresh water reserves. Quality isn't the issue so much here -
sheer volume is. We'll never be able to support either the industry
or population to drive it that the US can. Our entire Nation's GDP is
comparable to California's...

So, if you've got it, you'll probably want to maintain it.Cheers,
Steve

 

Racist Phil wants to feel like a real white American male!
Well I don't blame him. Let him have some white pride day.

 

I find this personally offensive. Although I am upset by the movement of US
manufacturing (and jobs) to the far east, I do not blame the residents of these
areas. I have had the opportunity to work with many individuals from Japan and
Chinese and have always found them to be polite and hard working. Their culture
is different than ours, and some of their values are different, but that
doesn't make them wrong and us right. It is the governments that decide on
environmental policies and import / export rules, not the individuals. It is
the short sighted over paid MBAs that are running American companies that are
responsible for sending the jobs to the Far East - not the poorly paid workers
in the Far East.

Ed

 

Yep. I blame short-term thinkers in corporations and their paid off
cronies in elected office that only care about the perception of making a
larger profit in the short term rather than the bigger picture. Not
to mention the government officals of those countries doing similar
things and worse to their own people.

The people of those countries are just trying to make some money and
get some food on the table. IMO, if the environmentalists and labor
unions really put their fundamental beliefs before politics there would
be a huge outcry about the pollution and the total lack of worker
protections in these countries. Instead there's a whimper now and then
about jobs going overseas, protecting US jobs and which famous person
has their signature line made in a sweat shop somewhere in the 3rd world.
If there really was a desire to protect US jobs and the environment they
would be pushing for laws that prevented the sale of products unless the
production met set a standards. This way the workers would have a safe
work environment, a clean environment, etc and so on.

 

There's the other side of that coin on which the local people are being
paid slave wages but resent idealistic U.S. college students protesting
the sweat shops, and the result being that the sweat shops close down
over the publicity and pressure, and instead of, say, a young girl
having a poor paying job in a sweat factory, she is now forced into
prostitution in order to live. I heard a program on NPR in which they
interviewed some of the angry foreigners about that while college
protests were going on in the U.S. (OK OK - I admit it - I sometimes
listen to NPR, or IPR or whatever they're calling themselves these
days).

Bill Putney
(to reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
address with "x")

 

I'm paying a smaller percentage of my income to tax now than when I made
$20k less.

So, the only thing that runs through my head at the people that whine about
the rich being over taxed is that they are lying or just plain stupid.

Marc
For email, remove the first "y" of "whineryy"

 

I don't. I pay for a number of shared in Microsoft. About 100 shares or
so as a guess. But I don't have a vote. Why? Because, like many others,
I have mutual funds that are managed by others.

The amount of stock I do own directly is inconsequential, as it is for all
small investors. The majority of stock owned in large companies is owned
by large companies or people with more than $1,000,000 per year incomes.
Despite the claims to the contrary, the vast majority of voting stock is
controlled by the financial elite.

Yes, I vote what I own directly. But like all other non-elite, my votes
are inconsequential.

Marc
For email, remove the first "y" of "whineryy"

 

Please start. I've never heard so many lies as a conservative describing
the "typical" liberal. I'm due for a good laugh.

Marc
For email, remove the first "y" of "whineryy"

 

Oops. Third least populous state. I guess I haven't looked at the
population numbers for a while.

Marc
For email, remove the first "y" of "whineryy"

 

Nah - it would all be true, but I don't feel like getting into a p***ing
contest over it. All one has to do is observe with blinders off and
eyes wide open.

Bill Putney
(to reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
address with "x")

 

I suspected that from Matts post. No harm done.

 

This year is the 50th annaversary of the CIA's overthrow of Democracy in
Iran.
See the book:
"All the Shah's Men: An American Coup and the Roots of Middle East Terror"
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0471265179/qid=1068997504//ref
=sr_8_xs_ap_i0_xgl14/102-0020534-2936176?v=glance&s=books&n=507846

This was talked about in National Public Radio.
You won't find this kind of history in public school for sure. The only
history that most American know about are Columbus discovered America, and
made friends with the Indians during Thanksgiving.


Even so, these countries were never

The US did not trust the Arab's democracy. We were afraid they would turn
Communist as you have mentioned. Therefore, we suppored Mohammad Reza Shah
who was a dictator set up by the US. It was easier to trust one person than
to trust the people in whole country. I suspect in the 50's part of the
reasoning was prejudice against Arabs. We treated them like we treat blacks
and other non-whites.

 

First of all, to describe what Iran had in the first half of the century as
a democracy is a stretch beyond reason. Also, to say that the CIA overthrew
the government is wrong. It is true that the US supported the Monarchy (the
Shah) in his struggle against the PM, Mossadeq, who was a Nationalist and a
Secularist. Here again is proof that many non-aligned nations at the onset
of the cold war played east against west. Mossadeq was courting favor with
the Tudeh (the outlawed Communist party supported by the Soviets) because it
gave him leverage against the west (primarily Britain, secondarily the US).
He wanted to nationalize the Iranian oil industry but made the mistake of
getting in bed with the Communists. This sealed his overthrow by the Shah
and the Iranian military with the support of the British and US, Cold War
politics being what they were at the time.

The Shah did A LOT to bring Iran into the 20th century and improve life
there. He was, however, a dictator and practiced brutality against his
enemies. One can focus on this and not be wrong in judging him. But to
assume that supporting Mossadeq would have been the right thing to do
ignores the risks of doing so.

There weren't perfect choices to be had.

Yeah, I'm sure the left and those who dislike the US for whatever reason
(and thus can't judge dispassionately), love this line about the US itself
having created the terrorist threat it is now fighting. What's your point?

Oh, yes. Of course we should teach history with an anti-American spin in
public schools. Maybe you're behind the times, Columbus has been on the
outs for years (treacherous lech that he was trying to find new trade routes
to the east).

The US didn't set up the Shah. He was there before the start of the cold
war. His beginnings as Shah were due to WWII politics when his father
wouldn't support the allies against the Nazis, so the British and the
Soviets got rid of him (sent him into exile) and allowed his son to become
Shah.

Where do you get your history lessons from? Perhaps they teach that the
dirty rotten US, Britain and the USSR overthrew a legitimately and
Democratically elected government in Germany. I suppose you could say that
and be right.

 

Is a matter of degree. Guess America currently is not really a democracy
either. It is mainly governed by corporations who have the finance to buy
political influence.

Also, to say that the CIA overthrew

The CIA tried once to overthrow Mossadeq, but the plan was discovered. They
tried the second time and succeeded. It was a direct intervention that
involved planning from both the CIA and the British. It sure does not sound
like just support for the Monarchy.

Here again is proof that many non-aligned nations at the onset

I suspect nationalizing the oil industry is where he made the major mistake.
That means major corporations will loose their investments. The US does have
this phobia against communist. Communism itself is not the problem. It is
the rulers who use communism as a front to gain power. Soviet Union was not
communism. It is really totalitarianism.

That is a weak argument to support a dictator. Hitler also brought the
Germans out of depression, and made them into a world power.

Love the line about how the terrorist are jealous of our wealth so they are
blowing themselves up. Bin Laden's family had more wealth than most American
will ever dream of having. George Bush did business with the family. Bin
Laden himself was a outcast of the family though. k ;l kk fffffggg p

 

Yeah, I'm sure the left and those who dislike the US for whatever reason

So you are saying we should only teach that America is the perfect Country.
Everyone else are evil of course what were you thinking. Sounds like Soviet
Union, Chinese and the North Korea education. There is a difference between
teaching to hate America and teaching to understand the issues. Politics are
influenced by many factors. There are people's prejudice, greed, large
corporations involvement as well as people's ego. These influence affect the
decisions, and there are consequence. Terrorism is in part one of the
consequence of our actions. The most important thing in education is to show
both sides of the issue. The good as well as the bad. The students today are
going to be voters tomorrow. They need to know what errors to avoid.
Look at something easier to understand. Why do blacks in inner city America
hate the whites so much. They don't wake up one day and decide to hate
someone. So much injustice have been done to them in the past that anger
builds up.
The same thing with the Arabs. If there were no oil in Middle East. I can
guarantee you that there would be no terrorism. Go figure. We here quickly
forget policies made in the past because it had no consequence us other than
that it kept our economy going and the oil flowing. Those in countries that
were affected by our policy can't forget as easily. It is dangerous to
ignore the cause of terrorism. Those people who thinks the terrorist are
just a bunch of lunatics with no cause are just adding fuel to the fire.
Just remember, we have until the terrorist gets their hands on a nuclear
weapon to solve this Middle East issue.

Ben

 

For a brief time, Mossadeq, it was correct.

What would you call organizing a coup then?

So, if say China doesn't like the Republican party here, it's OK for them to
help groups try to overthrow the US government?

And SAVAK really improved life there.

Yeah, democracy is always a risk. Totalitarian regimes are so much easy to
control -- deal with a dictator, one person. No wonder the US supported them
in Chile, Nicaragua, Guatemala, El Salvador, Uruguay, Cuba, South Vietnam,
etc., and continues to support them in Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Egypt, etc.

 

A form of gov't can be judged by how well it prevents (or tends to
prevent) those who would be despots from taking control, and how
resistant it is from evolving into totalitarianism. In that sense, yes,
communisim is/was the problem. It sure didn't take Stalin and Lenin
very long to "evolve" far from the "ideal".

So far our constitutional republic form of gov't has met the criteria
the best of any other form (I did not say it was perfect, just the best
so far).

Bill Putney
(to reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
address with "x")

 

At least the Dems didn't have a Chinese spy on the payroll!

 

Let's just say that in America, the voters are pandered to. They weren't so
much in Iran. With the constitutional monarchy, certain groups had power
and others didn't. The clergy were out of the loop with both Prime Minister
and the Shah. Now it's the other way around.

In the US, corporations have self interest to be sure. Nothing wrong with
that. Not everything they want is bad or evil either as the anti-globalists
would have you believe. Even Democrats know that, though you wouldn't think
that by listening to their rhetoric.

The left, Socialists and Communists, would have you believe the answer to
corporate power is to fight them; to create trade unions or tax them into
submission or outright take them over (nationalize them). I think a better
counterbalance is education. The uneducated poor are in a bad way
regardless of who has the economic power, the government or private
enterprise.

You cannot dismiss the US side of the Cold War as a mere phobia or an
irrational fear. FromWWII to the 60's the USSR gained in military power to
the point that the US couldn't defeat them on the battlefield (Western
Europe) except to use nuclear weapons. The Soviets were so aggressive at
the time that our good friend Charles de Gaul pleaded with the US to promise
to use nukes as a first strike if the Soviets invaded Europe.

Communism doesn't work and can only persist by force. It stifles the
creation of wealth and in the end everyone is equally poor and miserable
except for a few connected to the party elite. The Soviets made no secret
of their intent to bring about revolution in the 3rd world: Southeast Asia,
Latin America and the Caribbean, the Middle East and Africa. They made no
secret of their intent to retake West Berlin. Phobia not required to be
worried.