blackascoal
The Force is With Me
Wars cannot be won without warriors.
In the battle to save humanity, there are few warriors
In the battle to save humanity, there are few warriors
Wars cannot be won without warriors.
In the battle to save humanity, there are few warriors
What is it good for? Absolutely, nothing.
Indifference is a problem but we don't need any more bomb throwers. Many people who are indifferent see that both sides have valid points but they are not willing/capable to put in the mental effort to figure out if there is one right answer (there is not) and many don't even understand why anyone is fighting. The fighting turns them off.
There are too many people thinking that their solution requires them to "kill" anyone who disagrees. If they disagree then they deserve to "die" or any damage they suffer is just, because they are really just evil businessman, theocrats, socialist, indifferent losers, whatever. Even the people they want to help then become evil if they don't accept the help you are willing to give. So many do gooders are convinced that they, alone, KNOW how to help others and they don't even ask the person needing help how they can help. That's why your "worker's of the world unite" will never gain traction. You'll help the worker, if he denounces his heritage, his family, his religion and accepts that anyone who does not agree is an evil bastard. You can't help anybody with that bullshit because they know you are lying, ignoring the truth and they never asked you to help them find a new religion. You don't care about them and they know it.
Often people just assume the first person that asks for help is in the right, but that's because they fail to consider the needs of others. The successful have needs and problems too, and ignoring them is counterproductive.
So, are we? and what can be done about it?
you seem to have hoarding and gouging mixed up. need a dictionary?The first thing you can do is save $49.00 by not listening to and getting sucked in by a sales video for over an hour! A financial crisis has nothing to do with food and water. The fields and crops will still grow. It will still rain. It all depends on the type of government in place at the time of a financial crisis. Whenever there is a crisis we see the same thing. Some people charge outrageous prices for a bottle of water or a gallon of gas. Of course, if one believes in the "whatever the market will bear" philosophy that means the wealthy will have plenty and the poor will have nothing.
On the other hand there is a different type of government. The type of government that usually operates during war time where hoarding is frowned against, to put it mildly. So when you go to the polls give some thought to the type of government you'll want in place if ever a crisis arises.
you seem to have hoarding and gouging mixed up. need a dictionary?
you might want to also try not involving government in things they dont' have the power to do, like prevent people from stockpiling....excuse me, you would call it hoarding.No, it's your reading comprehension. Sorry I talked about two things in the same post. I'll limit it to one at a time so you won't get confused.
you seem to have hoarding and gouging mixed up. need a dictionary?
you might want to also try not involving government in things they dont' have the power to do, like prevent people from stockpiling....excuse me, you would call it hoarding.
If the US has plenty of wheat then US citizens shouldn’t be paying top price.
So, are we? and what can be done about it?
I'll ask again .. are you familiar with the concept of intellectual warfare?
Isn't that what you suggest you are doing with the Republican Party?
Didn't you take democrats to task for not engaging others among them who are unprincipled?
determining the minimum and maximum amounts of food ingredients, or of how much electricity and water, that a family is allowed to use or consume a month is not ensuring domestic peace and tranquility. I'm fairly certain that your vision of the future world is not one of utopia, but one of tyranny.If governments don't interfere in a crisis you can be sure the people will.
During WWII many countries had rationing coupons. For example, two pounds of butter a month. (Remember most people baked their own food so butter was readily used.) Also, coupons for meat purchases ensuring everyone had enough. So, whether one went to the store with ten dollars or a hundred dollars they could only buy two pounds to butter per month. Or a certain amount of meat.
Yes, the government can definitely get involved to ensure domestic peace.
determining the minimum and maximum amounts of food ingredients, or of how much electricity and water, that a family is allowed to use or consume a month is not ensuring domestic peace and tranquility. I'm fairly certain that your vision of the future world is not one of utopia, but one of tyranny.
I've already schooled you on wheat production, and here you yammering on again about it. Do you grow wheat? Do you know how to grow anything? You talk about how the land could still be farmed in a global economic collapse, but the land doesn't grow stuff by itself, people have to plant things and tend them, then harvest them, etc. There are a LOT of steps before it gets to your grocery store.
You couldn't school a two year old. lol: Talking about schooling I just schooled you on how the price is set. Domestic price is set on world price. What is it about that you do not understand?
I think the course can be changed, but it won't be easy. I actually think what will happen, before we ever change... a worldwide cataclysmic disaster of the size and scope we can't imagine. Maybe an asteroid? Maybe a series of major volcanic eruptions, maybe a gamma ray burst? Something is going to happen to set mankind back about 1,000 years or so, and that is when the 'credit/finance' problem will be remedied. It's not going to be a pleasant period to live on Earth.