Re: Data on new US jobs.... OR it takes two to tango...



On Thu, 21 Jul 2005, dps wrote:


Well, I have to 'blow' my secret email address. Now I'll get spam, but its fun to converse with someone who addresses all or most of my points.
Why should you? You can distort it and succer the robots 

Let the 'game' begin...see below...

Great, 

Excellent!!!

I got my sports outfit on. So for starters, let me note that IMHO a
fruitful conversation is only achieved if there is a a common basis of understanding.

This may be too ambitious. It is a fact and phenomenon on the newsgroups that very often the conversations branch out and "commen basis" is never acheived but the participants end up cursing each other and then stop talking. However, I love the fun, entertainment, and sometimes learning something new.

Towards this, let me tell you that I have a couple of crazy
ideas. Like anyone else, I just think that everybody can understand these, which is so untrue and unfair. So let me first clarify these so that there is a common understanding:

a) NOT everything in my life is done for money.

A lot of people have hobbies and spend money on fun that they make from things that are often not fun.

Most is done for fun (I even
got a PhD for fun ;-) ). I have tried and to a large extend achieved not to measure everything with money, as money is not exactly my target.

Yeah, but most of the world just appreciates money, only, and they don't look at you PhD but how many BMWs you have.

For
example, you get crazy when you think of the money an actor (BTW do you know the annual income of G.Lucas?), a football player or any other scumbag makes. So what? Is this really what I am looking for? In the end, can I be a scumbag? Can I do the things those people did? How would I feel if I did that? So you figure out there's another thing that is more important to you, you can get it and still feel nice.

I like the idea that I can retire from my job and really really pursue hobbies. Also, have a health plan so if I get sick then the hospital will not take my house away (this happens here, by the way).

b) I actually believe that to some extent, everybody is responsible for anything. We are all variables in the same multivariate function. Others have a large weighting factor and are raised to a large power, others don't. (This function is a bit unique as it incorporates elements from evolution theories and fuzzy logic.) You can actually - in your own way - tweak your weighting factor and power. What I want to say with all these weird stuff is that we are mostly watching what others do and not what we do. I prefer to classify responsibility and put myself on top or at least pretty close to the top. To some extent, we are all responsible for what's going on. This way, for each situation, I first try to figure out what I did wrong which led to this situation and try to do something about it next time.

That's fine, I will submit your name to the terrorist bombing club as a guy who they can put at their next target and that way you will take all responsibility and they will escape. ;-)

so, let's start all over ;-)


Oh, so you do not believe in plots, scams, trickery, deception, or crime?

Certainly, but check out (b) above.

Nah, I keep it simple. A theif comes with a gun and wants to take my money and as far as I am concerned it is HIM, not ME, who is responsible.


Nah, I think, like Hitler, Ghengis Khan, Nero, Napoleon, etc., there is a small fraction of all people who are born and they, one day, say to themselves "I'm going to 'get' the rest of the world, and get all kinds of innocent people to help by giving me their money and blood." And, some of these will use lawyers, accountants, lobbyists, bribes, favors, etc. to do this.

Yes, it's called ebriety 
                   ^^^^^^
I don't know this word.

of power on wealth. But people are not exactly innocent, especially in our days, that they have internet at their disposal.

OK, I'll sell you consulting services on how to survive "responsibility" next time the theif comes to you with a gun. Suggestion for free: "OK, don't be where the theif will be and you will be OK, right?" But, the problem is, the theif follows you around and you don't know it. Now what?

I think there are many selfless (opposite of selfish) people. Sometimes they are in churches, sometimes in charities. There are others. But, its very rare.
Do you beleive though, that such people consider themselves innocent? At least the ones I know don't. In fact they believe exactly the opposite.

I'd like an example. How could someone who, gives you, for MY example, money for nothing could consider himself innocent?

This is a nice idea. The examples are revolutions, revolts, and rebellions. Nice.
There is not only silence and detonation. There's a whole range of actions in between, and that's called life in my book. I cannot be either idle or revolt.

You can speak for yourself. Others will be either idle or revolt. For example, we had many bombings recently in London and Egypt.

Since you have been studying ancient greek history lately, let me
tell you that the major achievment of the particular civilization is "metro". This small word does not have an exact tanslation - at least in the way I understand it - but you can try a combination of moderation - normality - proportion - norm (maybe fuzzy logic ;-) ). It simply says there's not only black and white, not even every single shade of grey you can imagine, but a whole range of colors. 

I would prefer less abstract explanations and concentrate on specifics.


Well, I think I do a lot less of this than many of my contacts.
I never made any personal accusations. Nevertheless, indifference is also a very bad habit.....


Oh, yes. Indeed. He is a theif. Period.
OK, OK, this is getting too personal, I won't take this any further... ;-) 

Oh, so you will be "idle" now, eh?



Always peripheral forces. Not always empire. Primitive (pre-literates) usually have no empires. This is before the copper/bronze/iron age. But, even in slave times, the peoples who became slaves (blacks from Africa) had no empire, no organization, weak weapons, etc. Incas had better organization, but were way behind the conquistadors from Spain. Just one example.

There's always an empire *relative* to the dimensions of what is called known world. Yor example proves exactly that. Black people from africa had no empire, but an empire dragged them to america. The same stands for the Incas. It was the empire of the pope at the time. Exactly one empire and peripheral forces.

Ah, but there was no empire in Africa. Only the simple explanation where the empire, being stronger, will win against the non-empire which is weak.


It depends on the situation, but all of the history I've been reading recently (would you like a list? I have them written down) shows that it has always been a small group of people who had money/power/influence and who organized to gain more money/power/influence. Even in the well documented Peloponesian War, the ordinary people were bitterly divided about the war(half wanted the war, the other hald did not want the war). But Pericles and his buddies were the ones to make the decision and he lost in the end.
... and all they managed to do was to destroy their own civilization. You're talking about a war that only had loosers...

Can you name a war that had no loosers? Maybe when, for example, the Russians moved into east Europe after WW 2, it was conquest without a shot fired. But, think about any (real) war: only in such rare cases (eg. Alexander the Great, Conquistadors vs. Incas) were the losses on one side very small compared to the other. Most of the time, both sides lost.

But greeks are a special case,
an unmatched culture, capable for the worst and best (mostly worst) and renouned traitors... The peloponesian war is a good example though of what happens in the case were there are two empires - they have to fight eachother - there can only be one. Also it's a good example of what happens when the empires have not conceived that the dimensions of the known world have increased - Athenians and Spartans were so sort-sighted that they ignored the Macedonians.

Well, that gets into a more complex situaton. The Macedonians grew after Athens fell and never recovered (about 300 BC, no?)


We also had peace protests here in the USA. Both against the Viet Nam war and now Iraq. I didn't like either war.

I know this - I cannot see the relevance.

It is relevant because there was a large anti-war feeling among our population, just as among the Athenians who were against the Peloponesian War.

Remember, my original starting point was that most wars are initiated by decisions made by a very small group of powerful and/or rich people. Usually, so far as I have read, "citizens" or little people do not organize wars.

Most certainly, it's a common mistake.


Mistake since it caused pain, death, and loss for the many underlings. The few overlings (like BMOs) had nice, safe, cushy chairs, far from the noise and bullets. ANd, they got all the money, too.

Not only that - It marks the beggining of the end.

For the underlings. Usually, the overlings continue to have nice, safe, cushy chairs far from the noise and bullets.

So, could you tell me what problems the US creates for you? But, you don't have to answer this if you don't want to. Just my curiosity. But, I can immagine many many problems that the US creates for many people outside the US (also sometimes for people INside the US, too).
I can name a lot - and have no problem to do it. But let's just pick energy and pollution.

Do you think my country, in these two areas, does not create problems for me, too?

It says in books that World War II was a _good_ war. It was good to stop Hitler. Yes, if you read some detailed books (I have one or two), there was some hidden benefit to the US for getting into WWI. Same for Kuwait when Iraq (who also made war on Iran just before) made war on it. It was not so clear that the US benefited very much, but there were always rumors that the richest Kuwaitiis "paid" the US for help. Maybe some secret documents will come out in 50-100 years to prove this. But, not in recent media articles.
Hitler did it for money and power. The US did it for money and power. Hidden benefit? Thanks to WWII the US are now an E M P I R E. Hidden, *Hidden* benefit? Note that the post-WWI US people did not want to be dragged into any other european war. 

But, what about the US politicians and bankers? Do you know how they felt?

They did not even want any relations with europeans. 

When did NATO begin?
Even France gave recognition, recently, to US aid in reconstruction.

Maybe exept germans, many really liked germans. They were drugged and dragged into the war by their own government.

Ah, let me suggest that they did not resist. I have a book "The Nazi Seizure of Power..." by William Allen. The German people were "intimidated" into going along with the Nazis and Hitler. I confess, however, that all while I was reading this book that I think the same thing could happen again in the future: a persistent radical small group can "take over" a country. And, you know the rest.

No benefit from Kuwait? 

Ok, tell me what benefit we got? Oil? A fee from the Kuwaitis?

Did you see
Fahreineight 9/11? 

No, but I heard a lot about it.

OK, I have to admit I do not really like Michael Moore.

The reviews were mixed, but I have stated many times here on the NG that I don't like Bush, I don't like the war, the war was based on a lie. If our govt wants to justify the war, it should just tel the truth: it is to expand US influence and presence in Asia. If I believe in freedom for all people, then this is bad. But, if I beleive in empire, then this is good.

The movie itself missed the point completely. BUT the info, available now even to US citizens, has previously been shown on BBC, TV5, even greek media, which are well known to be controlled by the government. Do you *actually* believe that it all is a coincidence? But you are not inncoent. You have been warned but did nothing:

http://www.democrats.com/node/5063

I will look later. But, this could be a biased story. We have a lot of this here and I would guess everywhere in the world there is a preference for telling some story based on the assumptions and prefernces of the speakers, owners, etc.



OK, what country are you in? If you don't mind. I will talk about THAT country a little, if I know much about it.
Greece. You know nothing about it because there's nothing to know about.

Oh, no! I loved the ancient Greeks. All that history. However, I discovered there is much more, even earlier, in Anatolia (Hittites, 1800 BC, Mesopotamia 3,000 BC, etc), and its wonderful so much actually is known. But, there were also very terrible wars.

And, I want to read about all of Europe, including Greece in recent times, because there really is some recent history there.

It
has few oil, full of sulphur. (I'd send you the related link at CIA, but for some reason I cannot reach their site....)

It recently had the Olympics. It was not so successful, but maybe there will be other things. I have seen many pictures of "today's Greece" including the cyclades. I even had an idea to learn some Greek. I have a grammar book, too.

You mean you would not care if a bomb landed on your country? Your house?
That proves you are a bit touchy... With "touchy" I meant your comment "Or, are you arguing that the US is bad...." Of course I care if a bomb lands on my house.

Then if you care if a bomb lands on your house, you are not "touchy"? I don't know. Do all Greeks like you not care about your home? Your country as home? Your own house as home?

I care if a bomb lands on anybody's house and I hate it. In fact, a
lot of bombs have landed on my mother's village and all the villages nearby, most inhabitants were slaughtered or burned, childred were blown up, her uncle was burned alive in a well, all of my family's possessions were either burned, destroyed, slaughtered or arrogated, the elders had their necks sliced, my father was held hostage of a firing sqad standing for days against a wall, etc etc.... I know all that from narrations, yet it is so alive, that I do care a lot if a bomb falls on somebody's house. "You'd do that too if it happened to you"

OK, may I say I am sorry for the loss of your family. So, maybe you too are "touchy"? Or are you _past_ that? And, I know many people who deal with tragedy in their life in different ways. Some will not talk about it, others will talk about it, still others will start crying.


No, I'd like to hear from others. And, I've had quite a few discussions with an Indian, Kamal Prasad, in the past, and he likes to tell the story something like "India is doing American a big favor" by taking all these jobs out of the US and moving them to India, and India doesn't need these jobs. Well, its not exactly what he says, but that is what it sounds like to me.
Everybody has his own perspective. Figuring that out, I mean, managing to see things trough somebody else's eyes gives you the required insight.

But if I think something is bad (or good), why should I care about the insight? You started by saying something like "I take all responsibility for everything" and I said something like "I can think of examples where I am minding my own business (as an innocent person) and some bad guy comes to me and ruins my life and I am definitely going to say it is HIS responsibility (and what are the police and courts and prison for?)". So, why am I "responsible" for getting the required insight to "forgive(?)" the bad guy who ruins my life? Maybe its a kind of Christianity? But I know Christians who will get a gun and deal with it in a different way.

Nah, India and China are just crazy with desire to make tons of money off the USA. Actually, every country out there sees the US as a big cash cow. Wants to sell us anything for money. However, its not so simple.
Isn't it what the US wanted to do? Become a big cash cow?

1. I have an economics textbook which shows that the sum what the USA made, in trade surplus, going back to 1900 is infinitesimal compared to
the sum of trade deficit ALL of our today's trading partners.

2. Not that I think everything the USA did was good (because I think we did some bad things, too), the USA did organize expansion of US power and it was also done to "contain" the USSR. I think it is fair to say that not only did a lot of countries _like_ what we did but a lot of countries did NOT _like_ what we did (and some became USSR clients, and some stayed neutral).

Why would anybody
then expect anybody not to see that?

3. (after 1. and 2. above) So, OK, now you explain your "insight" or picture which involves the two items (#1 and #2 above).

But, back in the Viking days (Norsemen, etc), they had theives too. So, they sail their ships over to Britain, take the women, take the gold, kill the men, ....ah hahaha... the Vikings say "the men there don't own the women or gold, we do" right? Just like human nature? Right? ;-)

So you actually think that vikings were villains while the english were saints?

Oh? Where in the history books does it say that the English _started_ these raids and the Vikings were the victims? And, if you talk about the English as if they were not saints, then why? Are you talking about lots of other wars? The story with the Irish? The Scots? The British Imperialism in India?

You need to answer my question, not ask another question.

Just like big corporate CEOs like Bernard Ebbers, Kenneth Lay (did you hear about these guys?). And, in court they said something like "I didn't know how all this money ended up in my pocket, but I should get to keep it"
BTW they were found guilty weren't they?

Ebbers got 25 years. Lay...trial not started yet, I think. Scrushy got off clean, but there is another charge against him. Many have already pled guilty without trial and some are in prison (it may just be a nice motel; they just have to stay in a room and watch TV but can have visitors, newspapers, lots of nice things...no real sweat or hard work..so its better to be a bank robber with pensil and spreadsheets than with mask and gun ;-) ).

Anywaym what do you thing these
people thought about Tom Cruise that you so happily finance by watching his movies? Not that this is an excuse for anything..

I really don't like most of our movies and I watch very few. The movies I watch are mysteries. eg. Hercule Poirot, Sherlock Holms, Inspector Morse, many others like that, etc. Sometimes I like the history movies.


Oh, the library is full of history books that explain the conspiracies. You can deny these stories, but I'll say if it is possible, then it is also probable. I shall have to confess a little conspiracy that I, myself, was involved in. Would you like to hear it?
I think the opposite, if it is probable then it is possible. But yes, conspiracies do exist, but do you let your own life be the prey of conspiracies?

I think it is not a good thing to look at everything as if it is a conspiracy. But, it is a bad thing to ignore the possibility that there is more than one agenda behind any given action. I have been actually in some actions where I knew that the real reason for something was not the publically given reason and at one time I did handle classified information. So, I know what I am talking about. Then there is this famous book "The Pentagon Papers." England has one too "Spycatcher." We also had another interesting book "The Invisible Government" (about our CIA, early 1960s) and the CIA offered to buy all of the first printing to keep it off the market.


A monopoly forms (not by your efforts) but you have to pay ten times the price for something you need. You take full responsibility?
YES! DON'T BUY THE GODDAMN THING. 

Can you live without a car? Its very hard.

DO YOU *ACTUALLY* NEED IT?

How do you think monopolies get formed? We had one in oil. Even 100 years ago it was very hard to live without oil. Our Rockefeller made a lot of money. So, did others.

GROW YOUR OWN
POTATOES IN YOUR BACKYARD FOR CHRIST'S SAKE!!! 

I'd love to. Do you?  ;-)

It took serious laws to form in the USA to fight monopolies. The big corporations use every trick to _steal_ more money. I have read many books on this.
Yes, I know.... 

OK. We also have Microsoft. I don't like them, either.

You are walking on the street and a terrorist with a bomb cause it to explode and kill or hurt you; you can't blame the terrorist?
The terrorist is inexcusable. Terrorism and violence has no excuse. Neither does the slaughter of people in Iraq or anyother part of the world.

Ah...finally....it sounds like maybe you would say the terrorist is "responsible," no?

Unfortunatelly violence is paid back with violence.

Ah... (for a different reason)... yes. Maybe its OK to "turn the other cheek"? But, I have done that many times and finally I got tired of getting two sets of scars, blisters, blemishes, and pain.

I can think of many other examples. If you still want to not "blame anyone else for anything but me" then I have some ideas for business where you will get some responsibility and I will get some money. ;-)

Is money your problem? 

No, I'm making a joke! Didn't yoyu see my ->  ;-)  above?

I mean do you miss money so much? 

Well, it sure seems like most people I know won't do anything without it.

How much do you make
a year? (OK don't answer that, I know it is impolite, I just asked as a matter of speaking) 

Oh, I make enough.

I bet I make ten times less. 

Oh? Maybe your cost of living is ten times less, too. Its all relative.

BUT if you want to be the
king of the world, go to Thailand, or better Vietnam. With a $1000 a month you'll be more than king.

They say I could go to Mexico and live better on less money, but I would not get everything. Plus, buying land and property is not so simple, they say. I'd rather go where I did not have to learn a new language, culture.

In practice, I think voters get very little power and BMOs and rich people can just have almost anything they want. And, quite a bit of the time the rich people have more money than can be justified on ANY basis (eg. monopolists).
OK, I give up this money talk... The way I see it, money chasing is the poppy that people are fed with... You hate people that have money yet all you want to do is become one.

No, I think you misunderstand me. I was never much interested in money, but I know so many people who measure and judge others by this criterion.

Isn't that hilarious? 

Mistake. Maybe you misunderstood me.

Nice analogy, but I think the structure would fall anyway without human help. Exception: some Roman and Greek structures from ancient times are still standing, no?

I never said there's human intervention, just dead weight and corrosion....

Yeah, but there are some structures still standing. Stones don't corrode very much.



Why would it backfire? It is just normal business. Only some weird religious crackpot(s), cults, crazy people, etc., would turn down money.

Actually, once recently, a guy tried to give me a dollar bill for nothing. Absolutely nothing. I said "I'm sorry, I decline and because I can't take money for nothing" but I actually asked him a minute later if anyone else turned him down. He said "Yes, a small number." Wonderful to know I am not crazy all by myself. There are others!!! :-)


Then you don't think that's normal....

What is your definition of normal? You make some specification that only a small fraction of everyone does? Or, do you look at what most of everyone does?

( I'm always right in the end ;-) ). 

Oh? I don't think we are at "the end" yet.  ;-)

As of backfiring, not anyone can be a scumbag....

Put a random sellection of people in a room, put a hundred dollar bills on the floor, and turn out the light for a minute. But, then, in my example above, a lot of people took the free money. But, then, it is not exactly a fair example. We also have a lot of cheating in our schools today that we did not have decades ago. So, there is a decline taking place.

Can you name some good Greek wine, by the way?





.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: ELEMENTARY 9-11 -- insider guilt established by new evidence
    ... Bill Moyer's makes the case for a populist alternative (since progressivism ... making less money today in real dollars than they did twenty years ago; ... But then class war was declared, a generation ago, in a powerful polemic by ... could call it trickle-down economics, except that the only thing that ...
    (sci.econ)
  • Re: ELEMENTARY 9-11 -- insider guilt established by new evidence
    ... Bill Moyer's makes the case for a populist alternative (since progressivism ... making less money today in real dollars than they did twenty years ago; ... But then class war was declared, a generation ago, in a powerful polemic by ... could call it trickle-down economics, except that the only thing that ...
    (sci.econ)
  • Re: Data on new US jobs.... OR it takes two to tango...
    ... Most is done for fun ). ... I have tried and to a large extend achieved not to measure everything with money, as money is not exactly my target. ... Black people from africa had no empire, but an empire dragged them to america. ... Even in the well documented Peloponesian War, the ordinary people were bitterly divided about the war. ...
    (sci.research.careers)
  • Re: Data on new US jobs.... OR it takes two to tango...
    ... Most people start a conversation with what you do in your life, meaning to check whether you make more money or less and they adjust their attitude thereof. ... guy who they can put at their next target and that way you will take all responsibility and they will escape. ... just as among the Athenians who were against the Peloponesian War. ...
    (sci.research.careers)
  • Re: OFF TOPIC Big Brother and the net
    ... assured us money could be made out of money. ... more than one hundred defense and aerospace corporations, ... Cold War, at Columbia University, researching, writing, and speaking ... NBC News, was. ...
    (rec.gardens.edible)