6 posts in this topic Last Reply
First: for soccer clubs in europe there is a basic rule, simplyfied saying: they can't spent more money on new players as they earned in the current season. Maximum deficit is 5 mio Euro.
Second: FC Barcelona settled a transfer fee of 222 mio Euros for their brazilian player Neymar in the strong believe no one can ever afford this.
With some tricks, Paris Saint Germain pays the 222 mio euros for this player.
Now FC Barcelona has 222 mio euros to spend, two weeks before in most european countries new season will start and transfer period ends. Now every club in europe is in fear of a sold out of their players, of a carousel where the smaller clubs will loose.
So this money - put into the market - will make the difference between top clubs and average clubs bigger.
But sports is about competition. Even when betting on sports, it's about competition.
But if money kills all the competition - where is the sense of having sports events?
By Mr Saturn64
2015 was a pretty good year for movies. As someone who goes to the movies quite often, I saw some good ones and some bad ones. Let me know your favorites (and least favorites)
The best movie I saw in theaters this year was Star Wars: the Force Awakens. I'll admit that part of the allure is that it's a Star Wars movie. I had gone on a binge of the original trilogy before seeing this, and the hype was up. When the Star Wars logo appeared on screen and the opening theme started playing... that was a special moment. That was when the reality that "I'm seeing Star Wars in theaters" kicked in. Oh, and by the way...
My second favorite was The Walk. This is a pretty biased decision, as anything revolving around cities and architecture is going to be on my list. It's still a good movie, and it's excellently filmed. It's still a great movie, but one I found pretty underrated. It didn't do too good at the box office, and I'm pretty sure I was the only one at the theater not AARP eligible.
My third favorite was Inside Out. I found it exceptionally creative, even by Disney's standards. And considering that Disney is the epitome of creativity in the film industry, that's saying a lot. It took abstract ideas, personified them, and made them memorable. The explanation of how Riley's mind works was also extremely thought out (pun intended) and worked despite its complications.
Humanity has accomplished great progress in many areas but with the great power granted by our knowledge comes great responsibility. We, as a civilization, have the knowledge of what inflicts harm, decreases harm, provides pleasure, bestows peace, propagates instability, bestows joy, and hastens the rate of progress. Those with the expertise in how to help humanity have a duty to share their knowledge (which most have been doing to the best of their abilities) but those with power and authority have a duty to listen to the experts, interpret the knowledge, and enact changes to make their jurisdiction a better place. Progress can be delayed and even prevented by adherence to traditions that no longer work in modern society, rejection of experimentation on larger scales with new techniques & philosophies that have been proven to work on smaller scales, and inertia at adapting and refining methods as they are continuously tested in the real world.
Thomas Jefferson, one of The Founding Fathers, once said "Every constitution, then, and every law, naturally expires at the end of nineteen years. If it be enforced longer, it is an act of force, and not of right." That is why the Constitution to the United States of America allows for amendments. The last amendment to be ratified was almost 25 years ago and it took over 2 centuries to be ratified. Traditionalism in the USA has caused the most strife in the 21st Century so far. The Republican Party holds onto ideals and traditions that, although worked in the past, no longer work today.
Discrimination is a type of harmful behavior arising from continued use of preconceptions about specific demographics after experience has proven those preconceptions to be inaccurate.
On the other end of the spectrum is the movement to enforce Politically Correct communication. This movement has propagated thanks to privileged (wealth, first-world citizenship, access to education and the Internet) youth complaining that their emotions are more important than learning, problem-solving, critical thinking, logic and even reason. Between the extremes of traditionalism & discrimination and the PC thought police is the vast middle ground occupied by the silent majority. Some members of the silent majority might view one extreme more favorably than the other but the vocal minority extremists view all outsiders (read: the majority) as threats to their ways of life.
In the civilized world, the vast majority of Negative Rights are universally granted (on paper) according to the law. A growing movement to force governments to provide things to its citizens has pushed for more Positive "Rights to be granted (on paper).
I believe that even more progress can be achieved in the areas of science, peace, prosperity, health and general happiness if Informed Consent (which already has perfectly strict definitions) allowed more to be done. I once heard about animal rights activists who violently free lab animals and believe that animals should have the same rights as humans. I think that animal testing should continue where optimal but "organs on chips" and expanded powers of Informed Consent to legally allow informed people to willingly allow researchers to treat them as lab rats (allowing all experiments allowed on rodents in the USA in 2000) with sufficient compensation according to risk (comparable to military members undergoing similar potential risks), harm to subjects (compensation to next of kin for medical expenses or death), and benefits to humanity (akin to a royalty authors get per book published).
Most Negative Rights are 100% Fundamental, such as the following:
Right to liberty Right to due process of law Right to freedom of movement Right to freedom of thought Right to freedom of religion Right to freedom of expression Right to peacefully assemble Right to freedom of association Many new Positive Rights are merely Privileges that are considered desirable nowadays such as provision of services, internet access and subsidies. Negative Rights tend to trump Positive Rights when the two conflict, as such Negative Rights are considered prima facie.
Privileges are benefits enjoyed for being a member of a certain exclusive group. There are privileges granted from being born in certain places, looking like people in power where you live, holding at least a certain minimum of wealth, holding a certain position, recognition for certain achievements, and ability to do certain things. Forcing a government to legally enforce more Positive "Rights" results in the privilege of citizenship (or legal residency) to outweigh other privileges both unearned (genetics and family wealth) AND earned (diplomas, degrees, certificates, elections, self-improvement, and economic success). Privileges are best when they can be earned and lost--such as through gaining and losing residency and citizenship for Positive Rights--which is why I believe that accomplishment should be actively rewarded and failure should be passively & indirectly punished. Your accomplishments measure how well you utilized your gifts (talents, opportunities, resources, etc) but doesn't directly measure quantity of gifts. Upwards Social Mobility in the absence of subsidies comes from extreme utilization of a small amount of gifts and downwards Social Mobility comes from squandering gifts.
Respect is an English word often misused. Every living, breathing human being deserves love, understanding, tolerance and support. Admiration, appreciation, agreement, and the power of fame are earned through a different type of "respect." English has better words than 'respect' for what all humans deserve from the lowest rungs of nonviolent criminals to the wonderful people who nurtured and taught us. All people deserve Rights and Acceptance. However, Privileges and Admiration can only be earned (sometimes others earn them on your behalf) but are often called "Rights and Respect."
What do you think? Did I get anything wrong? Did I oversimplify anything important? What are your opinions?
Most importantly, what rights do you think humans innately possess? How often are these Fundamental Human Rights denied? Do you believe any Fundamental Human Rights can be lost (through atrocities), if so can they ever be regained through good deeds?
By A Nonny Moose
Why don't snivel serpents look out the window in the morning?
Recently Browsing 0 members
No registered users viewing this page.