isn't feeding them the problem?

Life, the universe, and everything.
Forum rules
- No personal attacks against players or staff members - please be civil!
- No posting of mature images/links, keep content SFW. If it's NSFW, don't post it on these forums.
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

isn't feeding them the problem?

Postby kiryan » Mon Jan 12, 2009 6:36 am

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/28579290/

The U.N.'s World Food Program is already feeding 1.2 million people in Kenya, said spokesman Peter Smerdon.

You can repeat this all over the world. The UN or the US/EU is feeding millions of people all over the world. Pretty much perpetually. Every year its more people that have to be fed on these programs.

Shouldn't we just let them starve to death once and then we wouldn't have to do this anymore. Instead we feed them, and they make more people that need to be fed. Do you really think that any of them will reach self sufficiency? Wouldn't they reach it faster after 95% of them die off? Wouldn't it be easier to train / teach them to be self sufficient when there are fewer of them.

random heartless thought before going to bed.
Ragorn
Sojourner
Posts: 4732
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2001 6:01 am

Re: isn't feeding them the problem?

Postby Ragorn » Mon Jan 12, 2009 7:10 am

Shouldn't we just let people starve to death so we can stop paying for their food? Because y'know, the entire point of life is for Americans to keep as much of our money within our borders as possible.
- Ragorn
Shar: Leave the moaning to the people who have real issues to moan about like rangers or newbies.
Corth: Go ask out a chick that doesn't wiggle her poon in people's faces for a living.
kwirl
Sojourner
Posts: 780
Joined: Thu Feb 08, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Delaware
Contact:

Re: isn't feeding them the problem?

Postby kwirl » Mon Jan 12, 2009 7:13 am

while i have been accused of sharing kiryan's logic on this particular topic, i will say also that a pretty sizable percentage of resources we allocate to 'help' get taken for other uses and never actually see their intended objective
Corth
Sojourner
Posts: 6002
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2001 6:01 am
Location: NY, USA

Re: isn't feeding them the problem?

Postby Corth » Mon Jan 12, 2009 1:18 pm

This is a big issue in North Korea. The government there will not allow food and fuel to be distributed directly to the people. It must be given to the government which then distributes it based on political objectives. Basically, if you support the government, you eat, if not, you starve. So indirectly our humanitarian support props up a vicious dictatorship.

I know its pretty heartless on its face but I think I'm with Kiryan here. If there were some sort of disasterous drought or something I think it makes sense to help. But a country that needs food support every single year.. your basically enabling an unsustainable situation. Better to give people more of an incentive to leave, or more of an incentive to produce.. and less of an incentive to procreate.
Having said all that, the situation has been handled, so this thread is pretty much at an end. -Kossuth

Goddamned slippery mage.
Vaprak
Staff Member - Areas
Posts: 630
Joined: Wed Feb 16, 2005 5:46 pm
Location: Midwest

Re: isn't feeding them the problem?

Postby Vaprak » Mon Jan 12, 2009 1:44 pm

While I more or less agree logically that it's insane for one country to try to feed everyone all the time, I do think that if the US were to stop 90% of the funding to "defense" and foreign intelligence gathering and covert operations there would be enough money to feed the entire world. Problem with that is that there's just simply not enough food available to sustain everyone at the level that we as Americans would like to be fed.

Imagine no possessions
I wonder if you can
No need for greed or hunger
A brotherhood of man
Imagine all the people
Sharing all the world


A great idea, but there are just too many of us human cockroaches on this planet to sustain it. We need either a cataclysmic event that wipes out half the human life on the planet or we need people to die off in poor/distressed areas en-mass (as they have been throughout history). It's just evolution/nature. Animal populations wax and wane and we're just animals that walk upright. Animal predators usually keep population explosion in check. Too bad we don't have any natural predators :( When you're at the top of the food chain and your food source dries up there's little left to do but die of disease and famine.
Vaprak, the Destroyer
-Formerly Tempus of HomelandMUD -- pre-merger
Sarvis
Sojourner
Posts: 6369
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Contact:

Re: isn't feeding them the problem?

Postby Sarvis » Mon Jan 12, 2009 2:12 pm

Vaprak wrote:While I more or less agree logically that it's insane for one country to try to feed everyone all the time, I do think that if the US were to stop 90% of the funding to "defense" and foreign intelligence gathering and covert operations there would be enough money to feed the entire world. Problem with that is that there's just simply not enough food available to sustain everyone at the level that we as Americans would like to be fed.


No one needs to be fed at that level. Doing so is why the obesity level in this country is so damn high.


A great idea, but there are just too many of us human cockroaches on this planet to sustain it.


Not really. How much food just gets thrown in the dumpster in this country, or gets eaten by people who really don't need a fourthmeal every day.

But hey, you're right. We'd all be better off if those damn impoverished people would just die off and leave us alone.
<a href="http://www.code-haven.com">Code Haven</a> - For all your programming needs.

I detest what you write, but I would give my life to make it possible for you to continue to write. - Some Guy Who Paraphrased Voltaire
Kifle
Sojourner
Posts: 3830
Joined: Wed Jan 30, 2002 6:01 am
Location: Huntington, IN USA
Contact:

Re: isn't feeding them the problem?

Postby Kifle » Mon Jan 12, 2009 3:40 pm

Sarvis wrote:But hey, you're right. We'd all be better off if those damn impoverished people would just die off and leave us alone.


Yes
Fotex group-says 'Behold! penis!'

Kifle puts on his robe and wizard hat.

Thalidyrr tells you 'Yeah, you know, getting it like a jackhammer wears you out.'

Teflor "You can beat a tank with a shovel!!1!1!!one!!1!uno!!"
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Re: isn't feeding them the problem?

Postby kiryan » Mon Jan 12, 2009 4:18 pm

nod kwirl, also a lot of millions in "aid" that the USA and other countries donate is not cash, its services usually carried out by the military. Its kind of playing with the numbers.

Japan is one of the few countries that actually gives cash.
Sarvis
Sojourner
Posts: 6369
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Contact:

Re: isn't feeding them the problem?

Postby Sarvis » Mon Jan 12, 2009 4:25 pm

Funny how it's a good idea to "give the Iraqi people freedom" by bombing them, but NOT a good idea to give Kenyans a chance at living by feeding them.

Bombs for teh win!
<a href="http://www.code-haven.com">Code Haven</a> - For all your programming needs.

I detest what you write, but I would give my life to make it possible for you to continue to write. - Some Guy Who Paraphrased Voltaire
Corth
Sojourner
Posts: 6002
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2001 6:01 am
Location: NY, USA

Re: isn't feeding them the problem?

Postby Corth » Mon Jan 12, 2009 4:33 pm

Nobody ever gave a shit about the Iraqis. Purpose of Iraq was to a) establish a base of operations in the middle east in order to put pressure on countries there supporting terrorism such as Iran and Syria; b) Demonstrate for the rest of the arab world the benefits of western style democracy; c) destroy WMD capability. It was always a big joke that this had anything to do with caring for people in distress. Unfortunately, only god has the capability of dealing with that on large scale.
Having said all that, the situation has been handled, so this thread is pretty much at an end. -Kossuth



Goddamned slippery mage.
Pril
Sojourner
Posts: 1834
Joined: Sat May 11, 2002 5:01 am

Re: isn't feeding them the problem?

Postby Pril » Mon Jan 12, 2009 4:37 pm

Sarvis wrote:Funny how it's a good idea to "give the Iraqi people freedom" by bombing them, but NOT a good idea to give Kenyans a chance at living by feeding them.

Bombs for teh win!


Pretty much. It's the same as the argument for the people who abuse the welfare system in this country. See all those threads for the same arguments. Basically Sarvis the way a LOT of people see it is we pay taxes to support our country not other countries. If people want to go out of their way and send money to organizations separately then great for them but there's no reason that money collected through taxes shouldn't be used for that. It's once again of living within your means. If you can afford to have kids then great have them. If you can't afford to have kids then STOP HAVING CHILDREN. It's really as simple as that.

Pril
The best of WTF statments of '06
--------------------------------------------------------
Danila group-says 'afk, machine gun in backyard started shooting cats'
Danila group-says 'afk a sec, 3 horned monkeys trying to steal hose'
Danila group-says 'afk, koala bear trying to mount my car'
Sarvis
Sojourner
Posts: 6369
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Contact:

Re: isn't feeding them the problem?

Postby Sarvis » Mon Jan 12, 2009 4:38 pm

Corth wrote:Nobody ever gave a shit about the Iraqis. Purpose of Iraq was to a) establish a base of operations in the middle east in order to put pressure on countries there supporting terrorism such as Iran and Syria; b) Demonstrate for the rest of the arab world the benefits of western style democracy; c) destroy WMD capability. It was always a big joke that this had anything to do with caring for people in distress.


No, that wasn't the joke. The joke was all the Republicans who fell for it hook, line and sinker and still believe that's what we're there for.

Unfortunately, only god has the capability of dealing with that on large scale.


In the absence of God (you know, that perfectly compassionate guy in the sky who never lifts a finger to help us) people CAN deal with that on a large scale. It may require fundamental changes in how we act, but we could do it.

Of course, we'd much rather drop food from an airplane than actually try to fix the problems these places face... so we probably won't deal with it... but I think we could.
<a href="http://www.code-haven.com">Code Haven</a> - For all your programming needs.

I detest what you write, but I would give my life to make it possible for you to continue to write. - Some Guy Who Paraphrased Voltaire
Sarvis
Sojourner
Posts: 6369
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Contact:

Re: isn't feeding them the problem?

Postby Sarvis » Mon Jan 12, 2009 4:39 pm

Pril wrote:
Sarvis wrote:Funny how it's a good idea to "give the Iraqi people freedom" by bombing them, but NOT a good idea to give Kenyans a chance at living by feeding them.

Bombs for teh win!


Pretty much. It's the same as the argument for the people who abuse the welfare system in this country. See all those threads for the same arguments. Basically Sarvis the way a LOT of people see it is we pay taxes to support our country not other countries. If people want to go out of their way and send money to organizations separately then great for them but there's no reason that money collected through taxes shouldn't be used for that. It's once again of living within your means. If you can afford to have kids then great have them. If you can't afford to have kids then STOP HAVING CHILDREN. It's really as simple as that.

Pril


How does anything you just said address our zeal for helping Iraqi people with bombs?
<a href="http://www.code-haven.com">Code Haven</a> - For all your programming needs.

I detest what you write, but I would give my life to make it possible for you to continue to write. - Some Guy Who Paraphrased Voltaire
Ragorn
Sojourner
Posts: 4732
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2001 6:01 am

Re: isn't feeding them the problem?

Postby Ragorn » Mon Jan 12, 2009 4:53 pm

The question is whether you see yourself as part of a nation, or whether you view humanity as a global community.

If you put yourself in an "us vs. them" mindset, then it's easy to talk about starving people to death and dropping bombs. I don't see humanity as a zero-sum game, where rich Americans lose when we pay support other humans.
- Ragorn
Shar: Leave the moaning to the people who have real issues to moan about like rangers or newbies.
Corth: Go ask out a chick that doesn't wiggle her poon in people's faces for a living.
Sarvis
Sojourner
Posts: 6369
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Contact:

Re: isn't feeding them the problem?

Postby Sarvis » Mon Jan 12, 2009 4:56 pm

Heh... just noticed your updated sig Rags. I like it!
<a href="http://www.code-haven.com">Code Haven</a> - For all your programming needs.

I detest what you write, but I would give my life to make it possible for you to continue to write. - Some Guy Who Paraphrased Voltaire
avak
Sojourner
Posts: 672
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 6:01 am

Re: isn't feeding them the problem?

Postby avak » Mon Jan 12, 2009 4:56 pm

Jeez, this is the thing about short-sighted conservatives....they don't even know what's good for them.

Since independence India has had to draw on foreign investments to finance part of its economic development ... Collectively, the Western nations have donated a substantial amount of aid to India. In 1980 this aid totaled nearly US$1.5 billion and reached US$2.5 billion in 1990. In 1992 Western aid reached a new height: US$3.9 billion, which represented 49.8 percent of all Western multilateral and bilateral aid given to South Asian nations that year


Image

India's GDP is US$1.089 trillion, which makes it the twelfth-largest economy in the world or fourth largest by purchasing power adjusted exchange rates. India's nominal per capita income US$977 is ranked 128th in the world. In the late 2000s, India's economic growth has averaged 7½% a year, which will double the average income in a decade


Nokar might have been too generous...even a four year old could figure out that equation.

edit - I just randomly picked India as an example because they're an emerging economic powerhouse. This concept applies all over. It's funny that such heartless douches actually think we give food to be nice. BTW, don't ask me who I mean by heartless douches.
Pril
Sojourner
Posts: 1834
Joined: Sat May 11, 2002 5:01 am

Re: isn't feeding them the problem?

Postby Pril » Mon Jan 12, 2009 5:01 pm

Ragorn wrote:The question is whether you see yourself as part of a nation, or whether you view humanity as a global community.

If you put yourself in an "us vs. them" mindset, then it's easy to talk about starving people to death and dropping bombs. I don't see humanity as a zero-sum game, where rich Americans lose when we pay support other humans.


I agree with you Rags but I don't think that tax money should be used for this. Or rather if it is then the government shouldn't be raising taxes to fix roads etc. We as American citizens pay taxes to support our country. If the money is being used to support other nations then when the government needs money they should pull the support before raising taxes on its citizens.

There are organizations that are specifically designed to help the needy people of the world. People donate money to them specifically to help the people of the world. The two should be seperate.
The best of WTF statments of '06

--------------------------------------------------------

Danila group-says 'afk, machine gun in backyard started shooting cats'

Danila group-says 'afk a sec, 3 horned monkeys trying to steal hose'

Danila group-says 'afk, koala bear trying to mount my car'
Corth
Sojourner
Posts: 6002
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2001 6:01 am
Location: NY, USA

Re: isn't feeding them the problem?

Postby Corth » Mon Jan 12, 2009 6:02 pm

Sarvis wrote:
Corth wrote:Nobody ever gave a shit about the Iraqis. Purpose of Iraq was to a) establish a base of operations in the middle east in order to put pressure on countries there supporting terrorism such as Iran and Syria; b) Demonstrate for the rest of the arab world the benefits of western style democracy; c) destroy WMD capability. It was always a big joke that this had anything to do with caring for people in distress.


No, that wasn't the joke. The joke was all the Republicans who fell for it hook, line and sinker and still believe that's what we're there for.


Jeez.. and I was agreeing with you that its idiotic to believe the Iraq war was about saving Iraqis. Your really do need to argue with everyone and everything. I guess ultimately you would say it was about halliburton :)
Having said all that, the situation has been handled, so this thread is pretty much at an end. -Kossuth



Goddamned slippery mage.
Sarvis
Sojourner
Posts: 6369
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Contact:

Re: isn't feeding them the problem?

Postby Sarvis » Mon Jan 12, 2009 6:14 pm

Corth wrote:I really do prefer the argue over the tiniest thing Sarvis...


Sheesh man, make up your mind!
<a href="http://www.code-haven.com">Code Haven</a> - For all your programming needs.

I detest what you write, but I would give my life to make it possible for you to continue to write. - Some Guy Who Paraphrased Voltaire
Corth
Sojourner
Posts: 6002
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2001 6:01 am
Location: NY, USA

Re: isn't feeding them the problem?

Postby Corth » Mon Jan 12, 2009 8:37 pm

Rofl. touche!
Having said all that, the situation has been handled, so this thread is pretty much at an end. -Kossuth



Goddamned slippery mage.
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Re: isn't feeding them the problem?

Postby kiryan » Mon Jan 12, 2009 9:31 pm

Do you think the billions in Aid we provided to India helped them to become a tech power house?

As far as I'm aware most of India lives in abject poverty and its only because their government and private sector jumped on IT 15 years ago that they have any kind of a future. I could be wrong.

I agree with Corth's addendum that we continue to feed only nations that are progressing. India imo is a good example. We are helping them with nuclear power tech to allow them to continue to develop as a nation. If we are responsible for their rise, then USA needs some credit.
avak
Sojourner
Posts: 672
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 6:01 am

Re: isn't feeding them the problem?

Postby avak » Mon Jan 12, 2009 9:53 pm

Yes, of course the billions in aid that India received helped them become a tech powerhouse.

What do you think it means when a government and private sector 'jumps on' an industry? Do you think a man in a big robe comes out onto a balcony overlooking millions of adoring peasants and decrees "We will develop IT!"?

I don't want to take it too far because you seem to be unraveling the 'mystery' on your own. But here's another clue:

MUMBAI, India—Outsourcing to India has delivered rich rewards for a number of companies, freeing up scarce funds to fuel strategic investments and, in some cases, corporate turnarounds. Next up: enlisting Indian partners to revamp business processes.

And those partners are willing. Indian providers are increasingly moving beyond a reliance on labor arbitrage to create intellectual property they can sell to customers. Several large customers told their experiences here at the Nasscom conference.

"Were aiming for 35 percent productivity improvement next year. Working with Indian suppliers will be a key part of that," said Paul Coby, CIO of British Airways, of Harmondsworth, England.

He said BA has already taken great strides, reducing IT costs by 40 percent and cutting $2 billion from the cost of running the airline. BA has 10 IT partners, two of which, Tata Consultancy Services and NIIT, are in India, said Coby.

So even in a selfish, cynical, ignorant worldview 'feeding them' is an awesome business strategy.
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Re: isn't feeding them the problem?

Postby kiryan » Mon Jan 12, 2009 11:06 pm

I disagree that our aid brought about India the tech power house except by a very indirect route. I don't know a ton about Indian history, but as far as I know the government has never until recently started to care about the low caste people, the poor rural people.

India's tech power house came about in the mid 90s based on the availability of cheap labor that could read/write english and a few private companies that struck gold in IT outsourcing which became an avalanche due to the lack of other jobs anywhere close to as lucrative. Really the government had nothing to do with it other than school being taught in english.
Sarvis
Sojourner
Posts: 6369
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Contact:

Re: isn't feeding them the problem?

Postby Sarvis » Mon Jan 12, 2009 11:39 pm

kiryan wrote:I disagree that our aid brought about India the tech power house except by a very indirect route.


So indirect routes don't count? No one said we gave India tech company startup cash, they said our aid (food and possibly education) allowed them to start a tech sector.

I don't know a ton about Indian history, but as far as I know the government has never until recently started to care about the low caste people, the poor rural people.

India's tech power house came about in the mid 90s based on the availability of cheap labor that could read/write english and a few private companies that struck gold in IT outsourcing which became an avalanche due to the lack of other jobs anywhere close to as lucrative. Really the government had nothing to do with it other than school being taught in english.



So do you think people could have studied computers and technology without the food we gave them?
<a href="http://www.code-haven.com">Code Haven</a> - For all your programming needs.

I detest what you write, but I would give my life to make it possible for you to continue to write. - Some Guy Who Paraphrased Voltaire
avak
Sojourner
Posts: 672
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 6:01 am

Re: isn't feeding them the problem?

Postby avak » Mon Jan 12, 2009 11:55 pm

kiryan wrote:I disagree that our aid brought about India the tech power house except by a very indirect route. I don't know a ton about Indian history, but as far as I know the government has never until recently started to care about the low caste people, the poor rural people.

So, what's preventing Kenya (or most of Africa) from becoming the next low wage source of global labor? Abject poverty and starvation...lack of education and infrastructure.

So, like I said...this concept applies all over and throughout history. I'd love to see your counter to the example of China.

China shifts from receiving to giving foreign aid as economic boom continues
guardian.co.uk, Wednesday 15 December 2004 00.04 GMT

China is set to complete the transition from aid recipient to international donor in the next year, the head of the world's biggest humanitarian agency said yesterday as he announced plans to phase out food support for Beijing and introduce a new period of cooperation to help poor countries in Asia and Africa.

In a sign of how market economics and disease have transformed the world order, James Morris, the executive director of the World Food Programme, said the shift was a sign of China's success in combating poverty, while Africa had become less able to help itself because of the Aids epidemic.

The WFP will make its last donation to China next year, marking the end of a 25-year programme which started in the wake of the Cultural Revolution and supported more than 30 million hungry people.
Tasan
Sojourner
Posts: 1710
Joined: Fri Mar 30, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Fridley, Mn USA
Contact:

Re: isn't feeding them the problem?

Postby Tasan » Tue Jan 13, 2009 12:06 am

Kifle wrote:
Sarvis wrote:But hey, you're right. We'd all be better off if those damn impoverished people would just die off and leave us alone.


Yes
Danahg tells you 'yeah, luckily i kept most of it in my mouth and nasal membranes, ugh'

Dlur group-says 'I have a dead horse that I'm dragging down the shaft with my 4 corpses. Anyone want to help me beat it?'

Calladuran: There are other games to play if you want to play with yourself.
Corth
Sojourner
Posts: 6002
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2001 6:01 am
Location: NY, USA

Re: isn't feeding them the problem?

Postby Corth » Tue Jan 13, 2009 12:14 am

Jeez. I think its a bit overly simplistic to say that food aid had very much to do with India's explosive growth in recent years. With regard to outsourcing, the biggest thing going for them is that they speak English. But beside that, India has always been known for its scientists and doctors. There are cultural issues here that differentiate India from other developing nations.

Heh, back in 1992 when this article was written, the Cato institute was suggesting that foreign aid was directly responsible for India's poverty and, yes, excessively SLOW growth.

Cato Institute wrote:India has had one of the lowest rates of growth of all developing countries and remains one of the poorest countries in the world after almost 45 years of aid-financed, centrally planned development. Foreign aid has directly financed and sustained India's centralized planning and control framework and thereby financed the growth of one of the noncommunist world's largest and most inefficient public sectors. In 1988-89, 101 of the country's 222 largest public-sector companies recorded losses and contributed to a federal deficit five times as large, in relative terms, as the U.S. budget deficit.(2)

Today, after nearly 45 years of planned economic development, India's annual per capita income remains around $300. Almost 40 percent of Indians live below the official poverty line, and the absolute number of Indians in that category increased sharply between the late 1950s and the mid-1980s. In short, India is a paradigmatic case of the failure of government-sponsored aid; it stands as a dramatic testimonial to why such aid should go the way of the socialist development model it has bankrolled for decades.


So what happened since 1992? One could argue that deregulation, which began in India in 1991, is responsible for the surge in growth. It sure makes a whole lot more sense than food aid.

American Spectator Magazine wrote:India's 1991 economic reforms abolished industrial licensing and many other controls, and demoted central planning to indicative planning. Deregulation plus investment in new infrastructure -- which provided the connectivity crucial for globalization -- created a million possible paths in place of the planned one. And entrepreneurs did the rest.

In under two decades, India has become a global force in computer software, business process outsourcing, R&D, and high-tech manufacturing. Before deregulation, no planner saw these as areas in which India could beat the world.


To further illustrate that point.. Compare North Korea's economy to South Korea. Same people genetically. Same geography. Same language and culture. South Korea embraces free markets and is a modern capitalist country with a very high standard of living.. North Korea spurns free markets, collects quite a bit of humanitarian aid, and is so destitute that graves are commonly dug up so that the dead can be eaten. Seriously.

I always thought this picture was a striking contrast. A satellite photo of the Korean Peninsula at night.

Image

Humanitarian aid really hasn't done very much for the North, huh?
Having said all that, the situation has been handled, so this thread is pretty much at an end. -Kossuth



Goddamned slippery mage.
avak
Sojourner
Posts: 672
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 6:01 am

Re: isn't feeding them the problem?

Postby avak » Tue Jan 13, 2009 2:46 am

North Korea is a terrible example because aid and food aid in particular have been intermittent and used as a tool of control by both sides. You're talking about one of the most oppressive governments in the entire world.

As for India, I know the example is simplistic. I'm simply not going to write a BBS thesis on why food aid is a good investment. The original thrust was to mock this idea that the world would be a better place if we just stopped food aid altogether and let 95% of the developing world die. The undisputed fact of the matter is that the first world countries need an economic base...we need an increasingly consumptive global population to prop up the global economy.
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Re: isn't feeding them the problem?

Postby kiryan » Tue Jan 13, 2009 3:07 am

Hmm would it really be 95%? Maybe, but lots of other awfully poor countries manage to grow their population. India and China for example. I'm just saying if they can't figure out how to feed themselves, let the majority of them die off and we'll help the ones who can figure out how to feed themselves.

With South Korea, I think it certainly helps to have a US military base there and the soldiers spending their money locally. Plus relaxed import tariffs to promote their economy.

and china... it was deemed all but inevitable in the past few years that China would take over. Their economy is currently collapsing on itself because it was export driven only. People are going from the cities and factories back into the countryside and what little service / consumption base they had evaporated. I'd take this point and further expand it to say new markets are nice, and you need a base to sell products too, but the majority of the benefit we get from developing nations is cheap manufactured goods and the unique case of IT out of India. Consumers in China can not buy a license of Microsoft Windows at $100,$200, or $300 a copy, a big screen tv or anything else.

I'm really not sure i would advocate letting them starve. But its an interesting idea. People here in the US should starve, theres plenty of opportunity even if you have to sell buttsecks. If you live in some god forsaken place like South Africa or North Korea, you don't really have a choice but to starve.
Pril
Sojourner
Posts: 1834
Joined: Sat May 11, 2002 5:01 am

Re: isn't feeding them the problem?

Postby Pril » Tue Jan 13, 2009 3:23 am

Also China is attempting to have some population control with their one child laws it's not just rampant growth like in other parts of the world.
The best of WTF statments of '06

--------------------------------------------------------

Danila group-says 'afk, machine gun in backyard started shooting cats'

Danila group-says 'afk a sec, 3 horned monkeys trying to steal hose'

Danila group-says 'afk, koala bear trying to mount my car'
Corth
Sojourner
Posts: 6002
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2001 6:01 am
Location: NY, USA

Re: isn't feeding them the problem?

Postby Corth » Tue Jan 13, 2009 3:27 am

Avak,

You say that NK/SK is a poor example because NK is an opressive government. From my perspective, thats exactly the reason why its such a great example. The only thing different between the two countries are the governments. The comparison very nicely illustrates the difference between socialism, taken to an extreme in North Korea, and capitalism in South Korea.

Kiryan points out that the large US army presence in SK helps their economy. I have no doubt that this is true to an extent. However, the SK economy is so large that its very doubtful that a few thousand soldiers parked there are really making much of a difference. Moreover, you need to also take into account the fact that North Korea has been aided to a great extent over the years by their own patrons, China and the Former Soviet Union.
Having said all that, the situation has been handled, so this thread is pretty much at an end. -Kossuth



Goddamned slippery mage.
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Re: isn't feeding them the problem?

Postby kiryan » Tue Jan 13, 2009 4:56 am

a few thousand now, but it was 25,000 30 years ago (at least thats what i've been told by veterans of that time period)...

I still agree with the crux of your argument, but north korea is also an example of how isolation and access to the American markets can be a powerful weapon. If we traded with them like we do with South Korea, Kim Jong Il might be able to afford to give his trusted advisors nicer gifts than rolexes.

But yea, communism is a failure. Socialism, relying on the government to provide your needs just makes you dependent on governmet to provide for your needs.
kwirl
Sojourner
Posts: 780
Joined: Thu Feb 08, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Delaware
Contact:

Re: isn't feeding them the problem?

Postby kwirl » Tue Jan 13, 2009 11:58 am

Not to hijack, but Slumdog Millionaire was a great movie, and gives you a really good look at what the living conditions are like there. If India is as colorful as that movie made it, then I think it is a place that I would like to see in my lifetime.
Kifle
Sojourner
Posts: 3830
Joined: Wed Jan 30, 2002 6:01 am
Location: Huntington, IN USA
Contact:

Re: isn't feeding them the problem?

Postby Kifle » Tue Jan 13, 2009 4:14 pm

kiryan wrote:and china... it was deemed all but inevitable in the past few years that China would take over. Their economy is currently collapsing on itself because it was export driven only. People are going from the cities and factories back into the countryside and what little service / consumption base they had evaporated.


When did this happen? I thought the economy was still showing steady growth -- albeit a smaller growth rate than before.

As for the topic, isn't there a saying about teaching people to fish or something like that? People lived in Africa for thousands of years before they had grain being flown in for them. There are a shit-ton of animals running around. If they can hunt, they can eat. I wouldn't mind subsidizing their diets if they made the effort to feed themselves, but, honestly, I think the money is better spent feeding the starving and homeless people here if anywhere.

In fact, I think the world should let Africa eat itself and return when the people there display some human decency and ability to adhere to simple human rights. I don't think we need diamonds that bad.
Fotex group-says 'Behold! penis!'

Kifle puts on his robe and wizard hat.

Thalidyrr tells you 'Yeah, you know, getting it like a jackhammer wears you out.'

Teflor "You can beat a tank with a shovel!!1!1!!one!!1!uno!!"
avak
Sojourner
Posts: 672
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 6:01 am

Re: isn't feeding them the problem?

Postby avak » Tue Jan 13, 2009 5:21 pm

Corth - I completely agree with the sentiment about the government structures. One of the flaws of socialism (or communism) is that it can never be manifest in a pure enough form to work. Similarly, libertarianism might work in theory, but is equally as elusive and esoteric in practice. Communist/socialist governments have failed because they go against human nature in such a way as to be self-destructive. North Korea is ruled by an oppressive dictator that uses food aid as a political tool. That says vastly more about dictatorships than about the merits of food aid.

I've been listening to Malcolm Gladwell's book, Outliers, and he talks about what makes great people great. One thing that struck me was the stories about early immigrants to New York. They started miniature family empires from literally nothing but hard work and good ideas. I couldn't help to think about how difficult that same approach would be in today's world of regulation and consolidation. By contrast though, I also thought about the abysmal conditions that existed back then...in textile factories, tenements, packing plants, etc.

I'd argue that the almost exponential increases in production and quality of life globally are due in no small part to the intelligent mix of pure capitalist incentive -and- the underlying propensity for humans to take care of each other.
Sarvis
Sojourner
Posts: 6369
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Contact:

Re: isn't feeding them the problem?

Postby Sarvis » Tue Jan 13, 2009 6:18 pm

Interesting web page on the subject: http://www.globalaware.org/Artlicles_en ... _intro.htm

Sounds like a lot of the problem is caused by how we try to monetize the land in these countries, preventing it from being used for farming. You're right, maybe we don't need to feed them. Maybe we should just stop taking their land for mines and dorit... I mean corn fields.

Kifle wrote:There are a shit-ton of animals running around.


I suspect that in a drought there actually aren't going to be a lot of animals around. They'll either migrate or die off themselves. Also there generally aren't going to be enough wild animals to feed a population of any size. That's why we have cattle. We can breed them and ensure there's enough tasty steak for everyone.

In fact, I think the world should let Africa eat itself and return when the people there display some human decency and ability to adhere to simple human rights. I don't think we need diamonds that bad.


Heh, you're right. We should stop violating decency and human rights to get our shiny rocks.
<a href="http://www.code-haven.com">Code Haven</a> - For all your programming needs.

I detest what you write, but I would give my life to make it possible for you to continue to write. - Some Guy Who Paraphrased Voltaire
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Re: isn't feeding them the problem?

Postby kiryan » Tue Jan 13, 2009 7:15 pm

These a few articles about the China thing and yes supposedly they are still growing, but it could turn on a dime and theres mounting evidence that they are standing on that dime. The case that china will keep growing looks weaker and weaker to me in the short term. They are basically wholly dependent on exports largely by keepign their currency low. They were rapidly trying to expand into neighboring countries who have cheaper labor because they were starting to get "pricey".

--

A bad point of globalism is that you have more options for how to use your resources. Sounds good, but if growing corn for ethanol plants in the USA pays better than growing corn for starving people in your own country, guess where the corn goes? Why feed your people when you get paid better somewhere else?
Kifle
Sojourner
Posts: 3830
Joined: Wed Jan 30, 2002 6:01 am
Location: Huntington, IN USA
Contact:

Re: isn't feeding them the problem?

Postby Kifle » Wed Jan 14, 2009 2:10 pm

Sarvis wrote:Interesting web page on the subject: http://www.globalaware.org/Artlicles_en ... _intro.htm

Sounds like a lot of the problem is caused by how we try to monetize the land in these countries, preventing it from being used for farming. You're right, maybe we don't need to feed them. Maybe we should just stop taking their land for mines and dorit... I mean corn fields.

Kifle wrote:There are a shit-ton of animals running around.


I suspect that in a drought there actually aren't going to be a lot of animals around. They'll either migrate or die off themselves. Also there generally aren't going to be enough wild animals to feed a population of any size. That's why we have cattle. We can breed them and ensure there's enough tasty steak for everyone.

In fact, I think the world should let Africa eat itself and return when the people there display some human decency and ability to adhere to simple human rights. I don't think we need diamonds that bad.


Heh, you're right. We should stop violating decency and human rights to get our shiny rocks.


Am I right or is that your poor excuse for sarcasm?

Anyway, I still think Africa needs to just be left alone for a good twenty years. Let the tribes fight amongst themselves if they still want the land that is then useless (that land which they largely fight about now). Let AIDS kill off the ones who can't keep it in their pants. Let the ones that cant farm or hunt die, and let evolution take care of the disease problem. Then we come back years later and see if they're ready to be civilized. Treat them as you would a child that acts up.
Fotex group-says 'Behold! penis!'

Kifle puts on his robe and wizard hat.

Thalidyrr tells you 'Yeah, you know, getting it like a jackhammer wears you out.'

Teflor "You can beat a tank with a shovel!!1!1!!one!!1!uno!!"
Sarvis
Sojourner
Posts: 6369
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Contact:

Re: isn't feeding them the problem?

Postby Sarvis » Wed Jan 14, 2009 2:15 pm

Kifle wrote:Am I right or is that your poor excuse for sarcasm?


Let's call it sarcasm. :roll:

Anyway, I still think Africa needs to just be left alone for a good twenty years. Let the tribes fight amongst themselves if they still want the land that is then useless (that land which they largely fight about now).


Because our mines are sitting on all the useful land?

Let AIDS kill off the ones who can't keep it in their pants.


Can we teach them about condoms first, or is the Catholic church still preventing that? Still though, expecting people to not have sex is the most ludicrous idea I've ever heard. You realize that Americans have sex too, right? In fact, everyone does. Show me one culture that doesn't, and I'll show you one that's gone extinct.

Let the ones that cant farm or hunt die, and let evolution take care of the disease problem.


You think evolution will happen in TWENTY YEARS? Are you kidding me?

Then we come back years later and see if they're ready to be civilized. Treat them as you would a child that acts up.



Worst. Parent. Ever. You discipline unruly children. Leaving them alone just makes them worse.
<a href="http://www.code-haven.com">Code Haven</a> - For all your programming needs.

I detest what you write, but I would give my life to make it possible for you to continue to write. - Some Guy Who Paraphrased Voltaire
avak
Sojourner
Posts: 672
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 6:01 am

Re: isn't feeding them the problem?

Postby avak » Wed Jan 14, 2009 6:15 pm

In response to what Vaprak was talking about much earlier in the thread....there is actually plenty of food production potential for the current world population. There are two huge problems though. One, Americans consume, on average!, 3700 calories per day!!! Two, the shift to a diet of substantially more meat protein is especially hard on the carrying capacity because of the relative inefficiency of meat production. Something like half of all grain in the US is dedicated for meat production. Tack on the fact that ethanol and biofuels are consuming another big chunk of that and you can see that the amount of grain that goes directly to people is pretty small. I'm not a vegetarian either.

As for population control...I thinks that's a pretty interesting discussion. First world countries are actually facing a population crisis from the other direction due to a -lack- of growth! Something I read recently said that the global population will start to decline around 2050.

Anyway, I don't thinking feeding them is the problem...I think I'm the problem.
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Re: isn't feeding them the problem?

Postby kiryan » Wed Jan 14, 2009 9:36 pm

We have a ton of luxuries and its hard not to argue that we have them at the expense of lots of other places in the world. Still, if the entire world left the entire continent of Africa alone for 20 years, it wouldn't have any affect on our economies other than a drop in food prices/production and reducing our deficit spending.
Kifle
Sojourner
Posts: 3830
Joined: Wed Jan 30, 2002 6:01 am
Location: Huntington, IN USA
Contact:

Re: isn't feeding them the problem?

Postby Kifle » Wed Jan 14, 2009 10:51 pm

Lol Sarvis, do you have children? No, stfu and please don't tell me how to punish a child. When and, by the sound of your love life, if you ever have kids, then you can have some input on this point -- because it is quite apparent by that comment that you know very little about the subject.

Secondly, on your first dissection, realize that the qualification is stating basically what you are. Reading comprehension anyone? As far as the sex thing. Yeah, sure, have sex, but the AIDS epidemic is MUCH much worse in Africa. So, if you like dying, I'm sure sex there is great. Look, they have to right to procreate if they'd like, but given the situation there, rampant unprotected sex (even protected sex with respect to AIDS, but I'm sure you knew that with all the reseach you've done on sex seeing as how you get it all the time) is very dangerous there. I have the right to run in circles around a lion, but I'm pretty sure i'm smart enough not to. So, I guess I'm not expecting them to have sex -- unless they're retarded. The smart ones will stop or be very cautious -- the ones I'd like to deal with after the 20 years is up.

As far as evolution -- I was using the term loosely and alluding to survival of the fittest. I.e. people with enough brains stop fucking like rabbits and complicating the AIDS matter. Also using the term as an intellectual indicator. Also using the term as a bit of an insult. I.e. you fucking neandrethal, stop punching everything in sight and evolve. But, hey, if the only thing you could argue there was some gay-ass semantic bullshit argument for the sake of being a bleeding heart, I guess I did pretty well.

:roll:
Fotex group-says 'Behold! penis!'

Kifle puts on his robe and wizard hat.

Thalidyrr tells you 'Yeah, you know, getting it like a jackhammer wears you out.'

Teflor "You can beat a tank with a shovel!!1!1!!one!!1!uno!!"
Sarvis
Sojourner
Posts: 6369
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Contact:

Re: isn't feeding them the problem?

Postby Sarvis » Thu Jan 15, 2009 1:05 am

Kifle wrote:Lol Sarvis, do you have children? No, stfu and please don't tell me how to punish a child. When and, by the sound of your love life, if you ever have kids, then you can have some input on this point -- because it is quite apparent by that comment that you know very little about the subject.


Right. Kids never, EVER cause trouble just to get attention from inattentive parents. Jesus, just having kids doesn't make you an expert on them. Not having them doesn't mean I'm ignorant on the subject either.

Secondly, on your first dissection, realize that the qualification is stating basically what you are. Reading comprehension anyone? As far as the sex thing. Yeah, sure, have sex, but the AIDS epidemic is MUCH much worse in Africa. So, if you like dying, I'm sure sex there is great. Look, they have to right to procreate if they'd like, but given the situation there, rampant unprotected sex (even protected sex with respect to AIDS, but I'm sure you knew that with all the reseach you've done on sex seeing as how you get it all the time) is very dangerous there. I have the right to run in circles around a lion, but I'm pretty sure i'm smart enough not to. So, I guess I'm not expecting them to have sex -- unless they're retarded. The smart ones will stop or be very cautious -- the ones I'd like to deal with after the 20 years is up.

As far as evolution -- I was using the term loosely and alluding to survival of the fittest. I.e. people with enough brains stop fucking like rabbits and complicating the AIDS matter. Also using the term as an intellectual indicator. Also using the term as a bit of an insult. I.e. you fucking neandrethal, stop punching everything in sight and evolve. But, hey, if the only thing you could argue there was some gay-ass semantic bullshit argument for the sake of being a bleeding heart, I guess I did pretty well.

:roll:


Let's see. Where to start... well, first off there is no genetic correlation between smart parents and smart children. Also it doesn't matter how smart you are if everyone teaching you about sex says "The only way to avoid AIDS is abstinence" (the catholic church) and "You can cure AIDS by raping a virgin." (The local Shaman)

We don't have nearly as much of a problem with it because we have safe sex programs, ads on TV and other forums of education that tell us to use a condom. You're delusional if you think there's really any other difference. Big Newsflash: Americans screw like rabbits too! Maybe not me, but lot's of them. Oh, and nice job on dipping to personal insults. Hitting me where it hurts too! Ouch, my arguments are invalid because I can't get laid. Oh man. How will I ever recover. :roll:
<a href="http://www.code-haven.com">Code Haven</a> - For all your programming needs.

I detest what you write, but I would give my life to make it possible for you to continue to write. - Some Guy Who Paraphrased Voltaire
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Re: isn't feeding them the problem?

Postby kiryan » Thu Jan 15, 2009 1:44 am

So are you an expert on children? or even competent?

or you just want to argue that you might be?

and yea, you document over and over that you are inept with women, but you would have us believe you know something about children. that right there is the epitome of foolishness.
Sarvis
Sojourner
Posts: 6369
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Contact:

Re: isn't feeding them the problem?

Postby Sarvis » Thu Jan 15, 2009 1:49 am

kiryan wrote:So are you an expert on children? or even competent?

or you just want to argue that you might be?

and yea, you document over and over that you are inept with women, but you would have us believe you know something about children. that right there is the epitome of foolishness.


What the hell does being good with women have to know with knowledge about children?
<a href="http://www.code-haven.com">Code Haven</a> - For all your programming needs.

I detest what you write, but I would give my life to make it possible for you to continue to write. - Some Guy Who Paraphrased Voltaire
Kifle
Sojourner
Posts: 3830
Joined: Wed Jan 30, 2002 6:01 am
Location: Huntington, IN USA
Contact:

Re: isn't feeding them the problem?

Postby Kifle » Thu Jan 15, 2009 3:10 pm

Sarvis wrote:
Kifle wrote:Lol Sarvis, do you have children? No, stfu and please don't tell me how to punish a child. When and, by the sound of your love life, if you ever have kids, then you can have some input on this point -- because it is quite apparent by that comment that you know very little about the subject.


Right. Kids never, EVER cause trouble just to get attention from inattentive parents. Jesus, just having kids doesn't make you an expert on them. Not having them doesn't mean I'm ignorant on the subject either.

Secondly, on your first dissection, realize that the qualification is stating basically what you are. Reading comprehension anyone? As far as the sex thing. Yeah, sure, have sex, but the AIDS epidemic is MUCH much worse in Africa. So, if you like dying, I'm sure sex there is great. Look, they have to right to procreate if they'd like, but given the situation there, rampant unprotected sex (even protected sex with respect to AIDS, but I'm sure you knew that with all the reseach you've done on sex seeing as how you get it all the time) is very dangerous there. I have the right to run in circles around a lion, but I'm pretty sure i'm smart enough not to. So, I guess I'm not expecting them to have sex -- unless they're retarded. The smart ones will stop or be very cautious -- the ones I'd like to deal with after the 20 years is up.

As far as evolution -- I was using the term loosely and alluding to survival of the fittest. I.e. people with enough brains stop fucking like rabbits and complicating the AIDS matter. Also using the term as an intellectual indicator. Also using the term as a bit of an insult. I.e. you fucking neandrethal, stop punching everything in sight and evolve. But, hey, if the only thing you could argue there was some gay-ass semantic bullshit argument for the sake of being a bleeding heart, I guess I did pretty well.

:roll:


Let's see. Where to start... well, first off there is no genetic correlation between smart parents and smart children. Also it doesn't matter how smart you are if everyone teaching you about sex says "The only way to avoid AIDS is abstinence" (the catholic church) and "You can cure AIDS by raping a virgin." (The local Shaman)

We don't have nearly as much of a problem with it because we have safe sex programs, ads on TV and other forums of education that tell us to use a condom. You're delusional if you think there's really any other difference. Big Newsflash: Americans screw like rabbits too! Maybe not me, but lot's of them. Oh, and nice job on dipping to personal insults. Hitting me where it hurts too! Ouch, my arguments are invalid because I can't get laid. Oh man. How will I ever recover. :roll:


Sarvis, your example is ONE reason out of an extensive list of reasons why a child should be punished or why they act up. Another is because they are being bratty. Another is because they just do bad things sometimes. I could go on. So, again, you are showing your ignorance on the subject. Calling someone "worst.parent.ever" because they choose to give children time-outs once in a while is just -- well -- fucking retarded and shows a complete lack of understanding of parenting. FYI, I'm pretty damn close to being an "expert" in child rearing having three of them myself and doing a damn good job at it I might add. Having kids may not make you an expert; however, being an attentive parent and producing children who perform well above average in society does. I'm there, are you? stfu please. I think "worst.parent.ever." would be a parent shortsighted enough to believe there is never a time where removal of the child from fun activities is a good punishment. Seriously, I'm going to just drop this argument. There's no reason to continue.

Good fucking god, Sarvis. Intelligence is a byproduct of evolution. If you feel like arguing this, slam your head against the wall a million times please. Sure, maybe it isn't in the short-term (i.e. passed on to children), but it is a large part of species evolution. Secondly, and again since you can't fucking read, I was using the term loosely in a condescending manner as an insult to stupid people. Read my examples in the previous post if you still don't understand. Read them over again until you do. As Ragorn instructed you in another thread, you are creating a strawman argument, and it is getting quite annoying. Stop doing it. Argue the merits of the argument or comment somebody is making or don't reply.

Lastly, it doesn't take advertisements for people to understand they get sick from fucking aids infested vaginas/dicks. I will guarantee people in problem areas are well aware of AIDS and how you get it. Also, condoms are not very effective against AIDS. But, I'm sure you knew that since you saw a commercial about AIDS and know how to put on a condom. I mean, it's hard to put on a condom, right? It's so hard we have to spend money teaching people how to do it! Big Newsflash: Americans screw llike rabbits too -- except we don't have a huge fucking AIDS epidemic going on! Here's another Big Newsflash: Conditions of the area in which an activity take place change the outcome of whether or not you should or should not do something in regards to your personal saftey! Nice argument though, but you should continue to use it around idiots who fall for it and keep it off boards where people have graduated middle school.

Thank you for the insult compliment. I thought the irony of you judging parents without having sex or babies was just too sweet to not point out. Next you're going to start giving advice to a woman on what brand of tampon is the best or the proper way to breast-feed a newborn. :roll:
Fotex group-says 'Behold! penis!'

Kifle puts on his robe and wizard hat.

Thalidyrr tells you 'Yeah, you know, getting it like a jackhammer wears you out.'

Teflor "You can beat a tank with a shovel!!1!1!!one!!1!uno!!"
Kifle
Sojourner
Posts: 3830
Joined: Wed Jan 30, 2002 6:01 am
Location: Huntington, IN USA
Contact:

Re: isn't feeding them the problem?

Postby Kifle » Thu Jan 15, 2009 3:14 pm

Sarvis wrote:
kiryan wrote:So are you an expert on children? or even competent?

or you just want to argue that you might be?

and yea, you document over and over that you are inept with women, but you would have us believe you know something about children. that right there is the epitome of foolishness.


What the hell does being good with women have to know with knowledge about children?


For starters, it leads to having children. Secondarily, it could also mean that since you can't figure out adult thinking processes to a level of competency to do something as simple as getting a girlfriend (second dates, whatever), it is very doubtful that you could understand the thinking processes of a child enough to properly punish them, reward them, etc. And I think your comments on the subject in this thread show the latter to be true without relation to the prior -- even though it is true as well.
Fotex group-says 'Behold! penis!'

Kifle puts on his robe and wizard hat.

Thalidyrr tells you 'Yeah, you know, getting it like a jackhammer wears you out.'

Teflor "You can beat a tank with a shovel!!1!1!!one!!1!uno!!"
Sarvis
Sojourner
Posts: 6369
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Contact:

Re: isn't feeding them the problem?

Postby Sarvis » Thu Jan 15, 2009 3:40 pm

Kifle wrote:Sarvis, your example is ONE reason out of an extensive list of reasons why a child should be punished or why they act up.


Yes, they should be punished. What you said before is you should leave them alone. Ignoring a kid is not punishment, it's irresponsibility.

So, again, you are showing your ignorance on the subject. Calling someone "worst.parent.ever" because they choose to give children time-outs


Giving a kid a time-out is NOT the same thing as ignoring him, which is what you said to do earlier and what I was reacting to. You are disciplining the kid with a time out, which is exactly what I said was needed.

Were you just trying to pick a fight or something?
<a href="http://www.code-haven.com">Code Haven</a> - For all your programming needs.

I detest what you write, but I would give my life to make it possible for you to continue to write. - Some Guy Who Paraphrased Voltaire
Sarvis
Sojourner
Posts: 6369
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Contact:

Re: isn't feeding them the problem?

Postby Sarvis » Thu Jan 15, 2009 3:41 pm

Kifle wrote:
Sarvis wrote:
kiryan wrote:So are you an expert on children? or even competent?

or you just want to argue that you might be?

and yea, you document over and over that you are inept with women, but you would have us believe you know something about children. that right there is the epitome of foolishness.


What the hell does being good with women have to know with knowledge about children?


For starters, it leads to having children.


Quagmire must be an expert then!

Secondarily, it could also mean that since you can't figure out adult thinking processes to a level of competency to do something as simple as getting a girlfriend (second dates, whatever), it is very doubtful that you could understand the thinking processes of a child enough to properly punish them, reward them, etc. And I think your comments on the subject in this thread show the latter to be true without relation to the prior -- even though it is true as well.


Yeah, fuck off. Women are far more complicated than kids, and yet my insecurities and lack of social skills have nothing to do with my knowledge of women OR kids.
<a href="http://www.code-haven.com">Code Haven</a> - For all your programming needs.

I detest what you write, but I would give my life to make it possible for you to continue to write. - Some Guy Who Paraphrased Voltaire
Pril
Sojourner
Posts: 1834
Joined: Sat May 11, 2002 5:01 am

Re: isn't feeding them the problem?

Postby Pril » Thu Jan 15, 2009 4:02 pm

Sarvis wrote:
Kifle wrote:
Sarvis wrote:
kiryan wrote:So are you an expert on children? or even competent?

or you just want to argue that you might be?

and yea, you document over and over that you are inept with women, but you would have us believe you know something about children. that right there is the epitome of foolishness.


What the hell does being good with women have to know with knowledge about children?


For starters, it leads to having children.


Quagmire must be an expert then!



HAHAHAHAHA Realle Sarvis? Really? First of all you have no idea how many kids Quagmire does or doesn't have. Second of all are you REALLY using a cartoon for your argument basis?

Sarvis wrote:
Secondarily, it could also mean that since you can't figure out adult thinking processes to a level of competency to do something as simple as getting a girlfriend (second dates, whatever), it is very doubtful that you could understand the thinking processes of a child enough to properly punish them, reward them, etc. And I think your comments on the subject in this thread show the latter to be true without relation to the prior -- even though it is true as well.


Yeah, fuck off. Women are far more complicated than kids, and yet my insecurities and lack of social skills have nothing to do with my knowledge of women OR kids.


And if you think Women are far more complicated than kids you're just wrong. Women are far easier to deal with than kids. Wait until you have kids and then say that. Especially if your kid is a teenager.
The best of WTF statments of '06

--------------------------------------------------------

Danila group-says 'afk, machine gun in backyard started shooting cats'

Danila group-says 'afk a sec, 3 horned monkeys trying to steal hose'

Danila group-says 'afk, koala bear trying to mount my car'

Return to “T2 General Discussion Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest