The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Back to Africa > Comments

Back to Africa : Comments

By Bashir Goth, published 13/1/2006

Bashir Goth rues the day that white man settled in Africa.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 15
  7. 16
  8. 17
  9. Page 18
  10. 19
  11. 20
  12. All
Has anyone considered the possibility that the Catholic Church is responsible for the disaster that is Africa? All that wealth in the Vatican. Surely they could afford to give generously. Why not Vatican Aid. It could be hosted by Yabby(if he could ever forgive those awful nuns).
Posted by FRIEDRICH, Tuesday, 24 January 2006 5:57:46 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
David_B “MESSIANIC” oh hardly, common sense more like.

This thread is going along a parallel course to the Greg Barnes Chinese Tsunami Article.

Re “survive the social unrest which could arise if say 20% of our GDP currently produced by Manufacturing, (28% in real terms)is gutted”

Now you see the point. Had government not been holding up incompetent and inefficient manufacturers, the attrition would have been spread more evenly along the time line instead of the “levy bank” breaking and the disaster happening all in one go.

The process of change is constant, making small almost continuous adjustments is easier than a huge shift, easier economically, socially and on just about every other parameter.

However, if the worst happens, we will survive it. Western economies survived the great depression, wars and the blimps of the past 40 years. The 1987 stock exchange crash, the dot.com blimp etc. Check what happened to the UK cities like Sheffield and Newcastle, 20+% unemployment for a decade or so. Then slowly, recovery. New industries, innovation, etc.

Now “I just hope that the discussions here do lead some bright individuals to launch out into the big beyond and go for it.”

Most effective economies have around 70% of all employment in smaller companies.

For the “life owes me a job” it will be tough, regardless.

For my part, I am investing heavily in a new "service" company, of which I own half the issued shares.

For you David, find the market for your eels and a unique way of marketing the benefits of eel meat. Of course distribution and packaging will require research being a perishable. If you want mentoring on it, leave a email address with Graham Young, he knows how to find me (sincerely).

The other things to remember are:
Reward increases because of risk.
Only the best deserve to win. The second best promote excuses for protectionism.
The market you do not service today is lost to tomorrow.
Posted by Col Rouge, Wednesday, 25 January 2006 12:54:49 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Tubley.. your idea “reasonable salary cap”. Tried and failed. That is why the Chinese are changing their economy. It is the “life owes me” attitude which David spoke of.

Next – Money. Forget all your ideas about “money”.
Whilst capital is needed it is of no use without innovation and the ability to see opportunity and exploit that opportunity. That is why Bill Gates is wealthy because he was an innovator (of sorts) he saw his opportunity (the Door IBM left open for him) and he exploited it.

I do not want a dollar diverted from Bill Gates.
I just want to live in the environment in which I get a chance to try to out perform Bill Gates and make all my friends millionaires in the process.

No one is “forced to eat a single McD burger, so any success they have is down to them. What would you achieve by limiting their enterprise and opportunity?
Where is the data on which you base your assertion that McD metaphorically “sell their grandmothers at a discount”?

Spare a dollar – sponsor a child – again proves my point. Philanthropy, patronage and compassion is only meaningful through private individuals and does not work when tried or imposed by government.

Re “gaining wealth but not excessive wealth”. Quantify “Excessive wealth”. My definition of “excessive” is different to yours, so whose definition should prevail?

Economics is a subjective art. It is paraded as a social science but has all the “scientific” attributes of voodoo.

Tubley, the point you miss is “wealth” is a sense of being, of purpose and self-worth. Wealth can exist almost entirely independent of “money”.

If you re-distributed the “monetary wealth” of the nation evenly across every member of the population, within 5 years the previously wealthy would be wealthy again and the previous poverty stricken, broke.

Why would that happen? Because of innate skill, attitude and unfortunately, for some, inherited stupidity. Check out how many tattslotto winners, who were busted-arse battlers, fail to hold on to their instant “wealth” and die in poverty.
Posted by Col Rouge, Wednesday, 25 January 2006 12:58:30 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Col, the idea of a reasonable salary cap may have been tried and failed in communist China but when I look at the status of our world, with most people living in poverty, I think the greatest human failure is that of selfish want and desire.

Life may not owe people as such but I sure feel like I owe a portion of the wealth of our own country to that of many others who still live in poverty. You mention exploitation as something that Mr Gates is particularly good a – again, a selfish view to use anything and everything to get what you want. I would think that any decent parent might encourage their children to be otherwise.

It is interesting that you live in an environment where you think you can outperform Mr Gates. Good luck to you. I feel I have already done so in my resolve that I am enough of a person without having to be rich. I never want to be a millionaire.

I therefore agree with your point, “Wealth can exist almost entirely independent of money" and “wealth is a sense of being, of purpose and self-worth”. I always agreed with you there.

No ‘adult’ is forced to eat MacDonalds but there is enough advertising around to show they are particularly fond of manipulating children to sell their rubbish. Children in turn put significant pressure on their parents to buy it. I consider the creative manipulation of children (and indeed using children in any advertising) as being particularly low.

As for my ‘data’, how much do you know about the McLibal case? I don’t think any multinationals become successful from being nice. In their annual reports they mention their vision of “global domination”. I dare say they would get a reasonable price for their grandmother.

www.mcspotlight.org

You are right about sponsoring children though. Governments cannot force it (although they can encourage it), so it is left to the good nature of people to help out. I personally feel pretty good about what I do.
Posted by tubley, Wednesday, 25 January 2006 5:30:22 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Continuing my response to your comment, Col...

Excessive wealth is the guy who lives up on the hill in a 3 million dollar mansion and has a billion dollars in the bank. I personally see no need for such indulgences while people elsewhere are starving.

I still think that economics is a social issue as it affects the lifestyles of so many people.

I agree with your comment about stupidity though – stupidity is everywhere. If not for the stupid and easily influenced then multinationals would have no chance. No doubt you think that I am one of the many stupid among us. Incidentally I do not think the same of you. I think you’re a worthwhile contributor to this forum like everyone else is, even despite your rude and abrupt mannerisms.

It’s just a guess but I even suspect you may work (on some level) for the forum since you have a way of moving the controversy along so well and as you seem to have some kind of symbiotic relationship with Graham Young. You also post an awful lot, too... 536 posts to date. I have to give credit to you there.

I am very skeptical however, of your ethics – through your opinion on stupid people you forget one thing – even the stupid need a fair chance.
Posted by tubley, Wednesday, 25 January 2006 9:17:48 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Tubley,

The nature of life is sinister if you are looking at it from idealistic eyes. Therefore it’s disheartening.

Basically money/business seem to dictate how and what lives/dies via warfare modes including cultural propaganda/colonisation, financial-domination and mass-murder.

But accepting this for what it actually is, I like knowing that I or other inspired and talented Aussies have the choice to make and sway the power of millions.

You and I share a wish to see all Animals treated decently.

If we escape idealism by embracing brutal reality, we too could create a multi-national vego/humanly grown/killed meats fast-food. We know there’s a market. I.e. the wealthy Body-Shop chain, basic cosmetics selling on nothing more than they are not tested on Animals.

I can’t help wonder if the huge PETA following and therefore financial market, had offered to promote Aussie killed sheep meat over live-export, what may have happened. Growth of humane farming? Fewer exports? More industry/jobs? Good PR?

Knowing the world will never become vegetarian, I’d rather lend our massive market as INCENTIVE to a humane farmer than righteously beat improbable vegetarianism. We’d set benchmarks way above RSPCA pace eggs etc.

Untypical thoughts in our shared Animal concerns I know, I think at worst vulnerable to mixes of practical improvement and natural corruption,

Practically idealism at it's best is a good market.(and it's a renewable free resource)

Seeya on the other thread for vego recipes and as you said a “grinding” over your support of Keysar Trad.
Posted by meredith, Wednesday, 25 January 2006 2:18:59 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 15
  7. 16
  8. 17
  9. Page 18
  10. 19
  11. 20
  12. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy