http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/bus...00/1896532.stm
Printable View
Chris there are far more important things happening in the world, like Rusty's bar bill......
I do NOT understand this freaking whining Europeans are aiming at us. The tariffs are for, mostly, Asian countries dumping steel in the US. We want to stop that and now your peeved at us because now they will want to dump in your countries.Quote:
"European countries fear that, with the US market cut off, steelmakers will redirect their exports across the Atlantic - perhaps as much as 15 million tonnes, according to the European Commission."
So your mad at us for not wanting something you don't want your-selves ??
To all in the EU....**** you and the horse you rode in on.
it's not just that, dip****. The fact you are impossing 30% tax on our steel is why we're pissed and you have no legal grounds to do it.
But yet again, the US does what it ****ing well wants and bugger the consequences.
Well, two can play at that game mister, which is exactly what we're doing.
Don't hold back there John, tell em what you really think;)Quote:
Originally posted by Patoooey
I do NOT understand this freaking whining Europeans are aiming at us. The tariffs are for, mostly, Asian countries dumping steel in the US. We want to stop that and now your peeved at us because now they will want to dump in your countries.
"European countries fear that, with the US market cut off, steelmakers will redirect their exports across the Atlantic - perhaps as much as 15 million tonnes, according to the European Commission."
So your mad at us for not wanting something you don't want your-selves ??
To all in the EU....**** you and the horse you rode in on.
I believe you have a saying about a rolling donut in your country...
Im not sure that there is any law against it, of course I'm not an expert on the World Trade Organazations Laws though. Don't forget the US is in a recession right now and we cat afford to keep loosing jobs at the moment. US Citizens won't stand for it. I was at the Riots in Seattle when the WTO came to town. Not participating, just sitting in a bar down the street laughing at the stupid jackarses getting teargased. The world get's pissed when the US preserves its own jobs, But would be even more pissed when whe don't hand out billions in relief and charity that comes from our workers taxes. Your welcome world for the 10% of my salary that goes to you every year. Mabe I'll work harder next year so you can have a tent with a bigger bedroom.Quote:
Originally posted by chrisjk
it's not just that, dip****. The fact you are impossing 30% tax on our steel is why we're pissed and you have no legal grounds to do it.
But yet again, the US does what it ****ing well wants and bugger the consequences.
Well, two can play at that game mister, which is exactly what we're doing.
AFAIK you don't give the EU a single penny in "aid"Quote:
Originally posted by BG
But would be even more pissed when whe don't hand out billions in relief and charity that comes from our workers taxes. Your welcome world for the 10% of my salary that goes to you every year. Mabe I'll work harder next year so you can have a tent with a bigger bedroom.
As for my £300,000/$420,000 5 bedroom "tent", you didn't give us any money for that either.
Wasn't talking about your tent, I know your taste is too high for the free ones :) . Mine is too. Talking about another part of the world that likes to complain when they don't get their free cheese bread and blankets.
I'm not 100% sure but I do believe the tariffs have been deemed illegal, otherwise the EU and china wouldn't have bothered moaning to the WTO. I am prepared to be corrected on that matter though.Quote:
Originally posted by BG
Im not sure that there is any law against it, of course I'm not an expert on the World Trade Organazations Laws though. Don't forget the US is in a recession.
the US is in recession but some economists reckon it will grow 2.5% next year compared with -0.5% (i think) this year
*cough*Percentage of U.S budget that was actually spent on foreign aid in 1998: 1*cough*Quote:
Originally posted by BG
Your welcome world for the 10% of my salary that goes to you every year. Mabe I'll work harder next year so you can have a tent with a bigger bedroom.
And in answer to another question. it is illegal. We have fair trade agreements between countries. The US regularly breaks these agreements to protect it's own trade, almost always at a cost to the American tax payer. Look at the US-Candian lumber dispute. America has already lost in International court 4 times. So now, they're slapping another tax on, and it looks like they will lose again.
Who ends up paying more for steel and wood in the US. Thats right, the US citizen. You guys are being screwed over by your government.
Who wins?, the big business's who fund the campaign elections. Funny that isn't it?
And they lose in another way. It probably isn't being reported down there, but the lumber industries are asking Canadians to boycott American owned stores in retalitaion to the taxes. Given that we account for 10%-15% of most of these stores income it might just get the message across. But I'm not so sure that supermarkets and hardware stores bank-roll Bush. So he probably doesn't give a shlt.
SD
SD
Well i hope they fight it out quickly, or this will be another soft-wood lumber dispute.
ROFLMAO... :D :D :DQuote:
Originally posted by BG
... Not participating, just sitting in a bar down the street laughing at the stupid jackarses getting teargased....
Classic, classic stuff.... can I put that in my resume?
:p
Saw something on PBS news a week or so ago that said that the U.S's spending on foreign aid (%) was the lowest of all Western countries... hmmm now I wonder how they record contra aid from arms sales :pQuote:
Originally posted by SurfDemon
*cough*Percentage of U.S budget that was actually spent on foreign aid in 1998: 1*cough*
Obviously not under foreign aid...:rolleyes:
Yip, apparently they are only number 21 in the league table of percentage of GDP given to foreign aid.
SD
If I had it my way the US would be dead last in that chart. It is ridiculous to force someone to give money to something they don't believe in. Leave that to the private orginazations. Then if you want to give them the money you can. Id rather they fix those damn potholes in front of my house that have been there since I moved in than buy another tent with my taxes.
Oh yea, SD if it makes you feel better, all of the wood furnishings in my house are made in canada from canadian wood. Better quality hands down. I only drink canadian beer now too. kokanee rules.
Yes indeedy, Folks. There you have it! The classic STICK YOUR
HEAD IN THE SAND AND GET PHUKED WHILE NOT LOOKING!!!!!
Sorry, BG. We did that in 1920. What it got us was 1936.
We did that in 1954. Can you spell Vietnam?
Every time we turn our backs on the world, we get screwed. But
then, hey! you wouldn't have potholes would you!
If it was something I cared about I'd give cash, If Englad sunk to the bottom of the ocean I'd buy some floating tents! If a brewery in Australia blew up, I'd send beer, When the trade centers were bombed who sent aid to us, European Countries, Australlia. Not the **** heads that we have given cash to in the past. Second of all We had absolutly no reason to be in any of those conflicts you mentioned. No one in vietnam was pissed at us for not giving aid, They were pissed because we showed up one day and started shooting everyone. Same thing with Korea and ever other mess we've been in after the WWI/II. The us government should stay the hell out of other countries problems unless they ask for help.
Uhh, maybe that's because they don't have any money to send you. That's why they receive aid and don't give it.Quote:
Originally posted by BG
When the trade centers were bombed who sent aid to us, European Countries, Australlia. Not the **** heads that we have given cash to in the past.
This all depends on what you think of as 'other countries' problems'. At the time the US considered communism to be a major threat (and still does for all I know). It didn't get involved for other countries' sakes.Quote:
Originally posted by BG
Second of all We had absolutly no reason to be in any of those conflicts you mentioned. No one in vietnam was pissed at us for not giving aid, They were pissed because we showed up one day and started shooting everyone. Same thing with Korea and ever other mess we've been in after the WWI/II. The us government should stay the hell out of other countries problems unless they ask for help.
Why do you think aid is given to these countries? Partially as an insurance policy. If you (we, as first world citizens) give them nothing while they suffer, it breeds hate. That causes terrorism. It's not the only cause of terrorism but it is one of them.
This is politics we're talking about, not really charity. Everything is done for a reason.
I seem to remember the US sending millions in aid to russia after communism fellQuote:
Originally posted by HarryW
Uhh, maybe that's because they don't have any money to send you. That's why they receive aid and don't give it.
My point exactly, why was communism a problem, no one in Korea or Vietnam thought it was until the US Government decided to poke it's nose in.Quote:
This all depends on what you think of as 'other countries' problems'. At the time the US considered communism to be a major threat (and still does for all I know). It didn't get involved for other countries' sakes.
I sort of agree, there is nothing wrong with sending aid but I dont think someone should be forced to. I do donate to charity my self every year. But I get to pick the charity. Please do not bring up the argument that no one woud donate if they didn't have to. It's a tax write off, they would. I'd rather send the money to something I feel is a just cause than have the government use it to give guns to seriously unstabel people, and then feed them after the destroy their homes. I do not agree that poverty 100% is the cause of terrorism. Look at mr. bil laden, He is rich from a rich family. He and many others are pissed about the US Blowing up and giving the people tools to blow stuff up, not because he is hungry. People handle poverty much better than seing friends and family killed by a bomb that says made in the USA on the side.Quote:
Why do you think aid is given to these countries? Partially as an insurance policy. If you (we, as first world citizens) give them nothing while they suffer, it breeds hate. That causes terrorism. It's not the only cause of terrorism but it is one of them.
They are very closley related when politicians, not people footing the bill are in charge of the charity.Quote:
This is politics we're talking about, not really charity. Everything is done for a reason.
Actually, that's not entirely true. South Vietnam didn't like it. The U.S of course used that as an excuse to start fighting, you know "Helping our S. Vietnam friends fight the oppressors from the north...yada...yada...yada..."Quote:
Originally posted by BG
My point exactly, why was communism a problem, no one in Korea or Vietnam thought it was until the US Government decided to poke it's nose in.
:rolleyes:
Like RJ said, that's not really true. They were (are, in the case of Korea) complex situations.Quote:
Originally posted by BG
My point exactly, why was communism a problem, no one in Korea or Vietnam thought it was until the US Government decided to poke it's nose in.
Well it's like an insurance policy, as I said. If it is a matter of national security and foreign relations then I don't think it should be just left to the individual to do all the time.Quote:
I sort of agree, there is nothing wrong with sending aid but I dont think someone should be forced to.
You're reducing an incredibly complex series of events that took place over many years to a sentence. It's not that simple. What was done was not done just for fun. It wasn't just something to do. It was seen by your government as the best thing to do for your country. Those actions and subsequent actions have had consequences, some of which might admittedly have been better foreseen.Quote:
I'd rather send the money to something I feel is a just cause than have the government use it to give guns to seriously unstabel people, and then feed them after the destroy their homes.
You don't agree with who? Nobody said it was '100% the cause of terrorism'. It is a factor though. In the case of Bin Laden, yes he is a very rich man but what he tries to represent and what he fights for is the people of the Middle East who he considers to have been unfairly treated by The West. He thinks the area has been exploited and that we are all greedy, meddling foreigners that need to be taught a lesson. His motivation is what he sees as unfair treatment by The West, and foreign aid is something that can help counter that kind of attitude.Quote:
I do not agree that poverty 100% is the cause of terrorism. Look at mr. bil laden, He is rich from a rich family. He and many others are pissed about the US Blowing up and giving the people tools to blow stuff up, not because he is hungry. People handle poverty much better than seing friends and family killed by a bomb that says made in the USA on the side.
It's not about charity all the time though, it's about politics. If it's politics then politicians should make the decisions. For purely humanitarian reasons, sure, let people make their own choice.Quote:
They are very closley related when politicians, not people footing the bill are in charge of the charity.
Understatement of the decade. The fact is some people should not be allowed to have machine guns and rocket launchers because they are f**king idiots.Quote:
Originally posted by HarryW
Those actions and subsequent actions have had consequences, some of which might admittedly have been better foreseen.
Insert the word "either" at the end of my first sentance in that quote. Sorry, I was agreeing with you.Quote:
You don't agree with who?
Harry W vs BG...round 1...
Ding ding! Who is the winner?
They were given arms to fight off the Soviet forces that had invaded Afghanistan. It seemed like a good idea at the time, just as it seemed like a good idea a few months ago to help the Northern Alliance forces. Would it have been better to have left Afghanistan alone? I can't say I have an answer to that. It was a complex situation that was handled a certain way at the time by people who knew a lot more about it than you or I. I don't think it's fair for us to accuse them of bad decision-making.Quote:
Originally posted by BG
Understatement of the decade. The fact is some people should not be allowed to have machine guns and rocket launchers because they are f**king idiots.
Nonetheless, let's do it anyway, hey? :pQuote:
Originally posted by HarryW
I don't think it's fair for us to accuse them of bad decision-making.
Poverty ain't even close to a 100% reason for terrorism. WAY too many "poor little rich kids" going off and blowing things up or protesting because they simply have no other way of proving themselves(or to buy/make friends or get back at "daddy", etc).Quote:
Originally posted by HarryW
You don't agree with who? Nobody said it was '100% the cause of terrorism'. It is a factor though. In the case of Bin Laden, yes he is a very rich man but what he tries to represent and what he fights for is the people of the Middle East who he considers to have been unfairly treated by The West. He thinks the area has been exploited and that we are all greedy, meddling foreigners that need to be taught a lesson. His motivation is what he sees as unfair treatment by The West, and foreign aid is something that can help counter that kind of attitude.
What was little Osama going to do ?.....couldn't impress anyone with financial success......becoming a artist/scientist/what-other, is too much work.....Hey, I know !!!! Let's blow shit up !!
Or it could be, that he's just a crazy **** who just likes to hurt people. His so-called reasons are just that.
Better discussion is why he ignores the brutal treatment of his own countrymen/women to attack us.
Charity starts at home and the Saudi government is a major-league charity case.(also include Iraq and Iran and Syria and....)
Thank you , thank you , thank you.Quote:
Originally posted by HarryW
They were given arms to fight off the Soviet forces that had invaded Afghanistan. It seemed like a good idea at the time, just as it seemed like a good idea a few months ago to help the Northern Alliance forces. Would it have been better to have left Afghanistan alone? I can't say I have an answer to that. It was a complex situation that was handled a certain way at the time by people who knew a lot more about it than you or I. I don't think it's fair for us to accuse them of bad decision-making.
I can't stand these people who look back at history and pass judgement based on what we know now. Freaking monday morning, arm-chair quarterbacks are a waste of good air.
Is it difficult to sound and act (speak, post, etc) so consistently ignorant and selfish?
It's a damn fine job you're doing there.... of course it could be that you just are ignorant and selfish...:rolleyes:
Wow.Quote:
Originally posted by rjlohan
Is it difficult to sound and act (speak, post, etc) so consistently ignorant and selfish?
It's a damn fine job you're doing there.... of course it could be that you just are ignorant and selfish...:rolleyes:
Nice meaningless post.
You must have spent alot of time on it.
John
Yea, Go Israel !!!
I put about as much research into that post as you did into yours...:rolleyes:
Hmmm... bet you studied hard to divulge that sort of factual information to support your pathetic hypothesis...Quote:
Or it could be, that he's just a crazy **** who just likes to hurt people. His so-called reasons are just that.
Ooo... here's another good one... I could learn something from insight like this...
Quote:
WAY too many "poor little rich kids" going off and blowing things up or protesting because they simply have no other way of proving themselves(or to buy/make friends or get back at "daddy", etc)
Definately. Yep. You've been reading encyclopedias and Harvard studies again, haven't you?Quote:
Charity starts at home and the Saudi government is a major-league charity case.(also include Iraq and Iran and Syria and....)
:rolleyes:
Poverty breeds desperation. You should't be focusing on Bin Laden's motives...They'll always be nutters in the world...the problem comes when people start listening to the nutters. Generally, people start listening to the nutters when they get desperate. They get desperate when they're poor and they see no way out.Quote:
I do not agree that poverty 100% is the cause of terrorism. Look at mr. bil laden, He is rich from a rich family. He and many others are pissed about the US Blowing up and giving the people tools to blow stuff up, not because he is hungry. People handle poverty much better than seing friends and family killed by a bomb that says made in the USA on the side.
Look at Germany after WWI, Hitler came to power because Germany was economically crippled having to pay back reperations to the victorious nations. The people lost faith in their usual politicians and were more suseptable to the ravings of a madman like Hitler.
If we don't want the people of the middle east to listen to the madmen that preach hatred for the west, it is in our interests to make sure they are not that desperate.
There's more reasons than politically inspired ones...
I reckon the world would be a much nicer place if we didn't have selfish fools like patooey telling everybody to bugger off, it's his money, and start helping those people who never had the opportunity to be such arseholes.
Mind you, forking out endless cash isn't the way to do it either, but economic support is a part of the solution. I think there are alot more (perhaps more significant and long-term) issues and impacts to consider. The world - the planet, that is - can't sustain a 'western' way of life for even 1/2 the population of humans on it. That's a factless guesstimate, and has no mathematical base in truth, however the fact remains, that we - as a race, consume FAR more resources than we replace, and the population continues to grow. It's like Agent Smith (?) says in the Matrix. Humans are a virus. Of course, I do like being a human, but with power and privelege comes responsibilty. Or at least, that is how things should be. No doubt patooey and the millions like him around the world won't accept that, but what we have, we can hardly say we earned in a historical sense. We had opportunity that many others never will.
This may seem like a silly suggestion, but I reckon something that could have a far greater, and more beneficial impact on living conditions (in some future generation, that is) would be pro-active birth control in under-developed, impoverished countries. I don't mean to stem the growth of future generations, but I reckon this -minor- aspect of education could have significant benefits. I think much of the richer nations of the world have really come down in terms of family size, but it seems that many of the poorer nations still have a massive majority of larger families, that can in no way be supported by the environment in which they live. Easier for 1 or 2 kids to get a feed than 6 or 10...
Anyways, that's just a minor thing, perhaps.
Bloody hell simonm you could clear a pub giving out free beer...
rj
You're the man!:D
Well said RJ, that may very well be the heart of the problem.
But how are you going to implement pro-active birth control in these countries when there is a widespread belief that more children equals more opportunities and possibly more money.
We are talking about a cultural factor here.
It will take time to change that pattern (generations in fact) and unfortunately many in the West don't have that time or patience. They usually want something in return on short term basis.
It won't improve when the oil reserves are used up and the wars over water will start.
I've argued this before but I still think we should really consider the redistribution of wealth. It may not be a viable plan but it may incite a new line of awareness.
But that is something that selfcentered, selfish arseholes like patooey will never understand.
It is sad but we may have to put them down for their own good ;)
Well, that's quite a useful skill to have, don't you think...More free beer for me!Quote:
Bloody hell simonm you could clear a pub giving out free beer...
True enough Wally - I don't think in reality that it is a solution, although I think there is some merit in my idea. I think a certain amount of cultural awareness on our part is necessary, however in the scheme of things, changing the living conditions, and all that comes with that for a few generations wouldn't be my personal goal here. Which means that I think those people (poorer nations) have a certain amount of responsibility here, in that they need (have to) accept some level of education and responsibility for the planet too.
Obviously, the resource consumption of those nations is nothing compared to the waste of the 1st world, however we just can't support the world's enormous population numbers at our level of living, which means there needs to be a decrease in population numbers. I would support a move to restrict family size in my own country. Bugger the whole idea of freedom. Not in cases like this, where there is much more at stake than a single aspect of the lives of one generation.
Redistribution of wealth isn't the answer - education is. However, I think we should be funding and supplying that education. Although, I'd like cultural elements retained - maybe train up local teachers/trainers in particular areas, help officials maintain things and whatnot. But throwing money at select individuals or groups won't solve anything. It'll just shift the apex of the problem to another place and time.
Unfortunately, I reckon humans will die out, a miserable, terminator-style death, unless we colonize other planets, and god I hope that doesn't happen. I'd hate for humans to find more species/planets to annihilate...:(
One minor point : with wealth I do not mean solely money.
For me it also consists of education, quality of life, intellectual wealth and the notion of equality.
Excellent point. Money isn't the sole issue here. :)
It is for most of the contributing simployts however :rolleyes:
You know, it's amazing what can happen when you give an inbred hick a shotgun and a flag, and ask for $5...:rolleyes:
I reckon you either have to be very nimble or very dead.
If they can manage not to point the barrel at their feet, that is :rolleyes:
*Checks RJ's pulse*
Is that u ??? :eek: What happened to the bloody poofta foreigners and kill em all... I'm gonna have to do it for you.. here is the solution to world peace etc
[RJ] Kill all the fcuking arabs cos they are all psychos that would be lost without a war or something to whine about [/RJ]
Hey that feels good... hmmm :D
You got it all wrong BB - I'm on their side. :)
I say kill all the bloody hick seppos who couldn't give a toss about anything except beating their wives and bragging about how 1337 they are...:rolleyes: ;)
Oh, and the wogs at Burwood...:rolleyes: :p