Dear Houellie,

I obviously wouldn't fit very well into a Mekong setting. My point was that the people who were uprooted fitted there very well - and they were probably reasonably secure in their environment. Their position in respect of food availability and community co-operation was perhaps less precarious than many people experience in the west

I was quite a fan of Tom and Barbara, as well.

Houellebecq/quote..<<Man..I wish..I had the/time..and patience..to read more-of..your stuff..>>i wish..you/would comment..on more/of..it

but i guess/thats not to be
but..never-the/less..
its great..your being/so nice/about-it

we have known...each-ther...long enough
for you to know...im on my third..writing-style

too many times..have i tried..to change..my poor writing
and frankly..if people still cant get it...
well..you know...what they..may/chose..to-do

the dead/give-away...is..they comment..
on a bit near/the end...meaning they at-least...tried
and onkly found..a bit..they could rebut..or refute...later

its sop..[standard-opperating/practice]
as im finding in my appeal[to the qld courts]
[appeal number d1761/10]...where the prostitution..
is unable to rebut/any..of my 244/page appeal...

[talking about..some/of..the points
i have raised on this...and other forums]

never/the-less..i got my hearing date today
so on 22/november..i will be in court..explaining
[in personum..point/by point..till they kick/me out]

so/im..only filling in..some-time..[posting/here]...till then

its/sad..you...like they...chose to not get it
but thats not/my..problem...at-issue..is however poorly/clumsilly..i put-it...the law has been broken..repeatedly..and systematiclly...

it is now a matter of record/
that they ignore..at their own peril

speaking...in a spiritual-way
they who have been given so much
have accorded the least..so little

there are yet several...more appeals..to go in this drama
allready..hrh...has had her notice of proceedings

as have the lower/courts...and the policing..[lol]...services
as a stranger..in these bad/south-lands...on the personal level

i have been much abused...but being of pure/dutch-blood...
plan to finnish...my material-appeals...in the haag/world court
[see the dutch people/you-know..them-what-got....on/foot..on the land..the other on the sea]...in return/for..hosting..the courts
are allowed..to petition..it

and while...there is no punishment-arm
there is..an accounting of/many abuses..being called..to account

that have persistantly/systematicly..treasonously..been suppressed/abused..

and that..my friend...binds their soul..

so no/matter...man/claims..to-not..comprehend..

spirit/most surely..reads..that..wrote large..on/my soul
and theirs

ahhh/men...
glad..to have-been..of service

its..not important..that you accord..it recognition
they most..surely shall...[in this life-time..or the next]

justice/denied...[and all that]

pip/pip...cheers/..and all/that..eh

*Are people really that ambitions Houlley? I don't think so*

I think that Houllie is right on the mark on this one. He is able
to understand others perceptions of the world, not just his own,
which is a rare quality.

Yup Pelican, many are very ambitious, its not just learned, but
goes back to inherited genes, for very good evolutionary reasons.

Think about it. Why are Europeans more inclined to worry about the
future, squirrel away assets etc? Go to Africa, its not an issue.

Yet our European ancestors, who did not squirrel away for the future,
would hardly survive a European winter. It hardly snows in Africa,
its simply not an issue.

In genetic terms, its only an eyeblink. 1000 years at 20 years
per generation, is only 50 grandmothers back. These things still
influence our behaviour.

Its not all inherited, some of it is environment. Note people who
have done it really tough. They know what tough is, unlike our
spoiled society, where everything is laid on a plate. Note those
Vietnamese, or old Italian migrants, working day and night to
get ahead. Its for good reasons. They appreciate what they have
and want security.

You Pelican, try to take the easy way out and simply blame
employers for not proving it on a plate for you. Yet employers
don't have that kind of security from their customers, so why
should they be responsible to provide it for you?

Yabby
You continue to misread and misinterpret much of what I say. I don't expect employers to lay anything on a platter but I expect to be paid fairly for the labour that I provide. Why is labour deemed less valuable to a person than property?

How do you define ambition? I have worked in quite senior roles and the view up there is not always pretty and if it means trading in your ethics I would rather not have it even though I understand that nothing is black and white and sometimes you have to work within a system to change it or to at least have a positive influence but that gets exhausting.

Ambition is fine, aspiring to have a big house or a posh car is fine, but don't do it if it means exploitation.

But Yabby you won't get it - you just want to see the world through your eyes and cannot see that some people want more simplicity or to get back to the earth, or not aspire to extreme wealth. Wealth is not the only measure of ambition. Some people may be motivated to drive positive change or to invent something of use, ambition is not just about money but it can be.

That may not be your cup of tea and if I do it at no cost to you or the taxpayer why is it of concern?

*you just want to see the world through your eyes and cannot see that some people want more simplicity or to get back to the earth, or not aspire to extreme wealth*

Absolutaly I can see that, Pelican. I personally am not even
ambitious. For many people its about security. If you reread
my post, I disputed your claim that some people are not that ambitious,
for they are. It can be winning in sport, whatever.

Reread your own posts and how I responded, it might eventually
twig

Yabby
I merely responded to your statement below:
"You Pelican, try to take the easy way out and simply blame
employers for not providing it on a plate for you. Yet employers
don't have that kind of security from their customers, so why
should they be responsible to provide it for you?"

I have rarely taken the easy way out and certainly have never expected anything on a plate. You seem to be of the view that anyone who values labour is automatically at a disadvantage in this debate. There is never only one side to a situation, the fact is employers tend to hold more power than the workers which is why my comments tend to advocate for the more disadvantaged group if the pendulum has swung too far the other way. There are many entitlements that I believe to be OTT on employers behalf as well such as expecting business to collect taxes via the GST, payment of excessive maternity leave provisions and in some other areas.

Think about what you say and how you word your posts and the accusatory tone adopted generally implying that anyone who holds employers to account is wanting stuff on a plate or the easy way. You want the employer to reap the rewards of their innovation or risk but don't want the employee to be recompensed for the value of their labour.

It works both ways.