two pics that really smacked me in the face .....

page: 5
76
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join

posted on Feb, 26 2013 @ 08:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by Guenter
reply to post by LightningStrikesHere
 


Hits the nail on the head, now doesn't it?
I blame pretty much the "invention" of money for this. While a plain old fashioned barter system exchanges goods that we have in abundance against goods we have not, money can buy "Anything". It has no value other than the # assigned to each product. $100 can by anything listed for $100. be it food, fuel, drugs, ammo, sex, you name it. While barter is a direct offer. I have X in surplus and need Y in exchange.


There is nothing wrong with the concept of money, as long as it has an inherent value unto itself. Gold & silver fit the bill quite well as they are suitably rare & finite and require time & energy to produce (mining, smelting/purifying, minting, etc). They are also far more portable than bushels of wheat or apples. If you want B but the owner of B doesn't want your C, it'd be nice if you have a medium to use to still make the deal... like a pre-measured amount (coin) of Ag :-)




posted on Feb, 26 2013 @ 08:44 AM
link   
reply to post by zigguratvertigo
 


I live about a mile away from a solar field in northern Indiana. When I drive by it and there is snow and ice covering the lousy thing, it's not making much power. You can't store the power either. Until the sun shines at night and better storage methods are discovered, it's just a pipe dream.

How do you plan on paying for it by the way?

And for national geographic, they predicted an ice age thirty years ago so take them with a grain of salt..



posted on Feb, 26 2013 @ 08:58 AM
link   
This image:



always reminds me of this one:



Poor, peace loving Third Reich. Poor, peace loving Islamic Republic....



posted on Feb, 26 2013 @ 09:15 AM
link   
reply to post by LightningStrikesHere
 


WAIT A MINUTE!!!

We have all those bases in the middle east, but NONE IN ISREAL, OUR ALLY????
That makes total sense! NOT!



posted on Feb, 26 2013 @ 10:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by Hopechest
reply to post by cass1dy09
 


That first picture is not accurate.

You may eliminate poverty for approximately 10 seconds then it will be back. At least that money spent on a war will end that current war and it probably won't happen again.

I read somewhere, some psych study, that if you gave poor people 10 million dollars they would be right back in their current situation within five years.

Its not about having the money its about having the drive to acheive and maintain that is the key.


The UN once projected that it would cost (ONLY) $33 Billion per year to eliminate "world hunger". And that includes keeping it eliminated. How much did we spend on just air conditioning our troops tents in Iraq and Afghan in 2010? Like 20 Billion.

And please source that "some psych study I read somewhere that if you gave poor people 10 million dollars they would be right back in their current situation in five years". Such generalizations are quite dangerous for the mind and soul



posted on Feb, 26 2013 @ 10:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by bacci0909

Originally posted by Hopechest
reply to post by cass1dy09
 


That first picture is not accurate.

You may eliminate poverty for approximately 10 seconds then it will be back. At least that money spent on a war will end that current war and it probably won't happen again.

I read somewhere, some psych study, that if you gave poor people 10 million dollars they would be right back in their current situation within five years.

Its not about having the money its about having the drive to acheive and maintain that is the key.






The UN once projected that it would cost (ONLY) $33 Billion per year to eliminate "world hunger". And that includes keeping it eliminated. How much did we spend on just air conditioning our troops tents in Iraq and Afghan in 2010? Like 20 Billion.


And please source that "some psych study I read somewhere that if you gave poor people 10 million dollars they would be right back in their current situation in five years". Such generalizations are quite dangerous for the mind and soul



The un has spent billions of dollars over the years and has not fixed poverty or world hunger. So do you really believe only 33 billion more will end world hunger? Besides Obama has us turning corn into fuel.. Yep, we are burning food!



posted on Feb, 26 2013 @ 10:39 AM
link   
reply to post by groingrinder
 


You assume that when we give billions of dollars to world leaders to help end poverty/starvation that the money actually goes to the people. It does not. It creates wealthy leaders, nothing more. Well, except new military equipment to further beat down those we try to help.



posted on Feb, 26 2013 @ 12:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by CALGARIAN
First pic is just garbage....

There are 45 police stations in my city, can gangs be a threat? YES.

*sigh*


I only read down to your post so I don't know if any following yours actually is PRO-AMERICAN!
When you have countries with leaders threatening to wipe other countries off the map what do you do? Give them a wide berth or do the sane thing and put enough arms in place around them a a deterrent?
Apparently the people like the OP didn't grow up during the height of the cold war, if he did he would know that the only thing that prevented WW3 was the United States and Soviet Union had missiles aimed at each other!
We could take out Iran from the mainland or from any of our Nuclear submarines prowling around hidden in the oceans but having basses on your border is a GREAT deterrent!



posted on Feb, 26 2013 @ 12:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hoosierdaddy71

Originally posted by bacci0909

Originally posted by Hopechest
reply to post by cass1dy09
 


That first picture is not accurate.

You may eliminate poverty for approximately 10 seconds then it will be back. At least that money spent on a war will end that current war and it probably won't happen again.

I read somewhere, some psych study, that if you gave poor people 10 million dollars they would be right back in their current situation within five years.

Its not about having the money its about having the drive to acheive and maintain that is the key.






The UN once projected that it would cost (ONLY) $33 Billion per year to eliminate "world hunger". And that includes keeping it eliminated. How much did we spend on just air conditioning our troops tents in Iraq and Afghan in 2010? Like 20 Billion.


And please source that "some psych study I read somewhere that if you gave poor people 10 million dollars they would be right back in their current situation in five years". Such generalizations are quite dangerous for the mind and soul



The un has spent billions of dollars over the years and has not fixed poverty or world hunger. So do you really believe only 33 billion more will end world hunger? Besides Obama has us turning corn into fuel.. Yep, we are burning food!


Yeah but you're assuming the UN actually wants to end world hunger.. which they don't. I'm just saying that's what they estimated. $33 billion. I imagine it was some special committee assigned to do the study and come up with a figure. Doesn't mean the UN is actually trying to end world hunger.



posted on Feb, 26 2013 @ 12:55 PM
link   
Half of the places named by the those black dots have no mention of any "military base".



posted on Feb, 26 2013 @ 05:44 PM
link   
got 'em flanked



posted on Feb, 26 2013 @ 07:54 PM
link   
Awesome pictures saw the second one especially.



posted on Feb, 26 2013 @ 08:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by Guenter
reply to post by LightningStrikesHere
 


Hits the nail on the head, now doesn't it?
I blame pretty much the "invention" of money for this. While a plain old fashioned barter system exchanges goods that we have in abundance against goods we have not, money can buy "Anything". It has no value other than the # assigned to each product. $100 can by anything listed for $100. be it food, fuel, drugs, ammo, sex, you name it. While barter is a direct offer. I have X in surplus and need Y in exchange.



Reminds me of a quote from Atlas Shrugged...

"When you see that in order to produce, you need to obtain permission from men who produce nothing - When you see that money is flowing to those who deal, not in goods, but in favors - When you see that men get richer by graft and by pull than by work, and your laws don’t protect you against them, but protect them against you - When you see corruption being rewarded and honesty becoming a self-sacrifice - You may know that your society is doomed." -- Ayn Rand, "Atlas Shrugged", 1957



posted on Feb, 27 2013 @ 01:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hopechest
reply to post by cass1dy09
 


I read somewhere, some psych study, that if you gave poor people 10 million dollars they would be right back in their current situation within five years.


You read somewhere...

That is the biggest and dumbest generalization i have ever seen and you just tossed it around because you read it somewhere. There are lots of people in this world that started out poor but are doing well later in life, even become rich. Its a bit mind numbing to read tripe like you just posted.

Now if you were to say "give dumb people 10 million" then yeah you would have had a point. (Dumb does not equal a lack of education mind you)



posted on Feb, 28 2013 @ 01:14 PM
link   
reply to post by LightningStrikesHere
 

Remarkable. I have never considered the US bases' locations before. How much does each one of these little jewels cost the US taxpayer each quarter, nay, each day to keep open and functioning? There is a part of me that wants to scream " Are you F^$@#ing kidding me???" The other pic is just plain true.



posted on Mar, 1 2013 @ 07:06 PM
link   
reply to post by Guenter
 


I agree that bartering is better than money, provided you have something to barter with, meaning something the other person wants or needs. Anything that people place a high value upon (gold, gems, oil, drugs, etc.) can foster greed. I firmly believe that the fiat money system and the international banks and multi-national corporations are largely to blame for the most heinous evils of the modern age and the general deterioration of modern society overall. It all comes back to money. However, what it really comes back to is avarice. If there was no money, greedy people would hoard goods. I can point out the problems fairly easily, but finding a logical and viable solution is where I run into a brick wall. Those in positions of power will not give up that power willingly, and unless and until we find some way of accomplishing this, without mass casualties, then we are just banging our heads against that brick wall, again and again.



posted on Jun, 8 2013 @ 10:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by icanhearmusic
Reminds me of a game of risk.


If that was the case all our bases would be in Australia.

2nd.



posted on Jun, 8 2013 @ 10:41 PM
link   
reply to post by LightningStrikesHere
 


Well, Islam is behind the twin towers and crashing planes into the towers.

Russia was a lot of things, and kept the lid on things in the mideast, both good and bad, and after USSR disbanded there needed to be a power sitting in the middle of that region over there.

Who would you prefer to be there? China? Germany? Syria? Canada? Australia? France? Japan?

Get real, the US is merely sitting on the region from where the terror originates and perhaps the individuals responsible will walk in front of the battle sights of an M16A4.





new topics
top topics
 
76
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join