10 Reasons to Believe That We're in a Depression [View article]
"...if man had never mutated from the apes"?? We ARE apes!
On Nov 20 11:11 AM bobbobwhite wrote:
> The problem is so much larger than what you say. At the core of it > all is the arrogant refusal(and perhaps innate inability) of modern > humanity to honor, respect and follow the basic laws of nature that > is the fundamental, underlying reason for everything that is wrong > with its relationship with the earth. Overpopulation in lower animal > forms is always controlled and balanced by natural forces, but humans > no longer respect nor adhere to any natural controls that humans > can dominate, even termporarily, knowing all the while that this > negligent behavior will end badly for the earth and for all future > humans, as we are now seeing occur in its initial stages. As we have > allowed ourselves to progressively devalue all respect for anything > other than all things human and care only for the satisfaction of > the immediate and personal now(no true concern even for our own grandchildren!), > that abject disregard will end our days much earlier than simple > evolution would have done naturally, as we are now too far down the > road of arrogance and disrespect of nature to change our ways in > time to reverse the immense damage already done. > > The earth will be the final winner, and regain its former health > in time, as it " knows" in its eternal Rock of Ages that it would > have been much better for all living things if man had never mutated > from the apes. But we did, and more's the pity, as we are all now > paying dearly for our temporary moment in the sun that we all mindlessly > thought would last forever as we uncaringly hurried it along toward > its end.
10 Reasons to Believe That We're in a Depression [View article]
What makes you think democracy is particularly essential? Democracy is an outgrowth of a strong middle class. If you don't have one, you cannot have a viable democracy. The US middle class is going to disappear. Democracy?
On Nov 19 12:02 PM Tony Petroski wrote:
> Mr. Clark: Entertaining article. > > "However, in the 21st century, cheap land, cheap labor and a younger > demographic profile, suggests that in 20 years, the reins of power > will be in the adolescent hands of a rapidly growing Asia." > > Maybe. But they don't have cheap land, and their labor is getting > more expensive, and they don't have a democratic means of transferring > power. > > The 21st Century is just getting started. The U.S. hasn't gone the > way of Rome yet and we're in the Age of Obama. > > We have more to contribute than military security (see how things > go when the Pax Americana is spoiled) and entertainment. We have > football, and the world will give up soccer once they see the alternative.
How is any other currency valued? People buy and sell it. Same with a world currency.
On Apr 05 09:23 AM longoil wrote:
> The concept of a global currency is not a new concept. In fact, Western > European nations and Japan had their currencies pegged to the US > dollar (which was a gold standard currency for central banks) from > 1944-1971 as per the Bretton Woods accord. Things started to unravel > when was a run on gold in the late 1960's. > > The problem with a global currency is who will set banking policy. > The "Euro" only became possible because a strong economic union > had existed between member nations, who have similar cultures and > banking systems, for 35 years prior to the common currency being > established. > > I don't see the US accepting a highly reduced role in setting banking > policy in this new global currency. I dont think the USA will accept > the influence of other substantial stake holders with diverse cultural > and banking standards like China, Saudi Arabia, Japan, Russia, etc. > > > Look what happened with the Euro, England could not agree to the > EU central banking policy and wound up keeping its only currency > in the end. If a global currency is established, I think the USA > will follow the footsteps of the British and keep their own currency. > > >
10 Reasons to Believe That We're in a Depression [View article]
On Nov 20 11:11 AM bobbobwhite wrote:
> The problem is so much larger than what you say. At the core of it
> all is the arrogant refusal(and perhaps innate inability) of modern
> humanity to honor, respect and follow the basic laws of nature that
> is the fundamental, underlying reason for everything that is wrong
> with its relationship with the earth. Overpopulation in lower animal
> forms is always controlled and balanced by natural forces, but humans
> no longer respect nor adhere to any natural controls that humans
> can dominate, even termporarily, knowing all the while that this
> negligent behavior will end badly for the earth and for all future
> humans, as we are now seeing occur in its initial stages. As we have
> allowed ourselves to progressively devalue all respect for anything
> other than all things human and care only for the satisfaction of
> the immediate and personal now(no true concern even for our own grandchildren!),
> that abject disregard will end our days much earlier than simple
> evolution would have done naturally, as we are now too far down the
> road of arrogance and disrespect of nature to change our ways in
> time to reverse the immense damage already done.
>
> The earth will be the final winner, and regain its former health
> in time, as it " knows" in its eternal Rock of Ages that it would
> have been much better for all living things if man had never mutated
> from the apes. But we did, and more's the pity, as we are all now
> paying dearly for our temporary moment in the sun that we all mindlessly
> thought would last forever as we uncaringly hurried it along toward
> its end.
10 Reasons to Believe That We're in a Depression [View article]
On Nov 19 12:02 PM Tony Petroski wrote:
> Mr. Clark: Entertaining article.
>
> "However, in the 21st century, cheap land, cheap labor and a younger
> demographic profile, suggests that in 20 years, the reins of power
> will be in the adolescent hands of a rapidly growing Asia."
>
> Maybe. But they don't have cheap land, and their labor is getting
> more expensive, and they don't have a democratic means of transferring
> power.
>
> The 21st Century is just getting started. The U.S. hasn't gone the
> way of Rome yet and we're in the Age of Obama.
>
> We have more to contribute than military security (see how things
> go when the Pax Americana is spoiled) and entertainment. We have
> football, and the world will give up soccer once they see the alternative.
One World, One Currency? [View article]
On Apr 05 09:23 AM longoil wrote:
> The concept of a global currency is not a new concept. In fact, Western
> European nations and Japan had their currencies pegged to the US
> dollar (which was a gold standard currency for central banks) from
> 1944-1971 as per the Bretton Woods accord. Things started to unravel
> when was a run on gold in the late 1960's.
>
> The problem with a global currency is who will set banking policy.
> The "Euro" only became possible because a strong economic union
> had existed between member nations, who have similar cultures and
> banking systems, for 35 years prior to the common currency being
> established.
>
> I don't see the US accepting a highly reduced role in setting banking
> policy in this new global currency. I dont think the USA will accept
> the influence of other substantial stake holders with diverse cultural
> and banking standards like China, Saudi Arabia, Japan, Russia, etc.
>
>
> Look what happened with the Euro, England could not agree to the
> EU central banking policy and wound up keeping its only currency
> in the end. If a global currency is established, I think the USA
> will follow the footsteps of the British and keep their own currency.
>
>
>