JanYpe

Originally posted by: Duke87 If I say that Jesus Christ didn't die for our sins but Julius Caeser did, you'd probably think me mad, right? Well, can you prove that you're right and I'm wrong? No, you can't. It can't be proven, there's only faith. Given that, what exactly makes my faith in Caeser less valid than your faith in Christ? Caeser may not have a holy book, but anyone could make one if they wanted. And having a holy book is not necessary, anyway. Many religions don't have one. Lacking any real proof and only having "faith", no one religion can objectively be considered more valid than any other. quote> Have you read Carotta's book about this? It's a fun little theory.

Originally posted by: Duke87 Originally posted by: manticorefan Also, Ghandi did have some real issues glossed over by history, like his admiration for Hitler. quote> He did write a couple letters to Hitler, addressing him as "my friend". And he did say in one of them that We have no doubt about your bravery or devotion to your fatherland, nor do we believe that you are the monster described by your opponents.quote> Of course, you have to remember, Ghandi was chronically incapable of hatred. He loved eveyone unconditionally, and essentially believed that if enough people did so it could end all the evil in the world. So of course he would write a letter to Hitler kindly asking him to cease violence and use his power to promote peace, actually believing it might work. And of course he would implore the victims of the holocaust to praise Hitler as his men killed them with the idea that it would make his heart grow three sizes and have him return all the toys to the little Jews in Jew-ville. The man was a total nut like that. Even still, he did have some pretty solid and admirable principles, and his "death by love" approach did work at getting India independent. quote> Not every bit of biographical information can be stuffed into a 50 word textbook blurb about someone. It hardly means issues were "glossed over by history". Gandhi's letters to Hitler, as well as his comments on pre-war Jewish persecution from the viewpoint of his nonviolent resistance philosophy, are all well-documented. When you consider that the "your opponents" Duke quoted were Stalinist Russia on one side and imperialist Britain and France on the other, I'd say it would be slightly unrealistic to expect Gandhi to be siding with any of the involved parties. Accusing the man of "admiration for Hitler" is not very accurate. In the same 1938 publication where he proposed a nonviolent Jewish response to persecution, he also wrote this: Source But the German persecution of the Jews seems to have no parallel in history. The tyrants of old never went so mad as Hitler seems to have gone. And he is doing it with religious zeal. For he is propounding a new religion of exclusive and militant nationalism in the name of which many inhumanity becomes an act of humanity to be rewarded here and hereafter. The crime of an obviously mad but intrepid youth is being visited upon his whole race with unbelievable ferocity. If there ever could be a justifiable war in the name of and for humanity, a war against Germany, to prevent the wanton persecution of a whole race, would be completely justified. But I do not believe in any war. A discussion of the pros and cons of such a war is therefore outside my horizon or province.quote> Returning to the original topic, my unsurprising test results:

Originally posted by: Patricius Maximus Ah, if only money was still based on tangible commodities, and not on the ever-fluid stock market, a practice full of deceit and uncertainty.quote> The dollar is not based on the stock market, it is based on "the faith and credit of the federal government", which in my view is worth nothing. But, don't worry. With Bernanke printing money like a maniac, hyperinflation is sure to happen by 2013, creating not a depression, not a great depression, but an economic collapse.quote> From reading all this it seems a lot more likely to lead to hyperbole than hyperinflation.

It's been reported that there are now five dead. It hasn't been made clear if it was one of the wounded victims who passed away or the driver, who was also in critical condition. The driver was not taken to the hospital this death occured in, but a different one. The youngest of the wounded is nine years old. Bizarre day.

Originally posted by: SkiGeek Originally posted by: ShortStraw PEOPLE! It's Shakespeare! Get a hold of yourselves for cryin out loud. Don't let your difficulty with your native language or your bad school experiences blind you to the simple obvious fact that the man is an icon for good reason. quote> and for those of us who don't think this is obvious, what is that reason? quote> Shakespeare is a cornerstone of (early) modern English literature. It's not like all English literature follows from him, but he was one of the important figures in the development of English as a serious language instead of just a vernacular one. For the same reasons Dutch schooling pays attention to writers like P.C. Hooft and Joost van den Vondel, because poets and writers like this stand at the beginning of the language you use today. :edit: Shortstraw said it better one post down.

Originally posted by: hym Originally posted by: Barbarossa I'm hopefully optimistic that you have read up on what a Letter of Marque and Reprisal is, yet I can't but wonder since you asked this question.quote> I knew what a LoMaR is before I asked my question. My question wasn't about LoMaR though. I was curious what prompted Jan's inclusion of the words "is just so staggeringly out of date." quote> Because the concept is, in legal, economic and practical ways, not of this time. You can't just buy a ship, arm it, gather a crew and set sail like you used to. To pose any credible threat to piracy, the modern day privateer would need a ship on the level of a modern day warship, trained crewmen who will risk life and limb as mercenaries, and the logistical organisation to support such a ship. Except one such ship, expensive enough, could only patrol a marginal stretch of coastline or guard a limited amount of civilian vessels. To be useful on any real level then, there would need to be a fleet of these privateers. How many private companies can finance that, and how many would survive in a market like that while remaining profitable? Because their payment would hardly be straightforward. They can't very well take plunder from pirates, since their business is based on ransoming civilians and cargo. Shipping companies leasing protection for X amount of time/miles? It's doubtful that would prove profitable either for the privateer, who has to deal with the sizeable cost of the ship/men/logistics, or for the shipping company. The shipping company would be exchanging the possible cost of a ransoming by pirates, who they know benefit from a peaceful end to the affair, for the certain cost of protection by one of these companies. A ship from such a protection company might fend off pirates just by its presence, but you can't be certain the pirates won't try to fight off these privateers and put the cargo ship in more danger than it would have otherwise been. And let's not forget that mercenaries have never been a particularly reliable force. How far would protection really stretch, and how long would it take for a privateer crew to say: "Screw this, we're not getting paid enough to die at the hands of desperate Somali's." The legal aspect, yikes. How would you, as the US government, hold those you grant a LoMar to accountable for their actions, for starters? Can you even expect countries that have long since abolished privateering and relinquished the right to issue letters of marque, in agreements like the 1856 Declaration of Paris and the 1907 Hague convention, to treat these privateers as friendlies? These seaborne protection rackets would after all be fairly shady business ventures, a rather small step above the pirates themselves. Or no step at all if you weigh the Somali motives, largely born out of need, against the motive of a private company, born entirely out of profitseeking. Which all ignores how boneheaded it would be to create private navies when national navies already exist. National navies that would likely do a better job, in an infinitely less dubious way than private persons issued with an archaic letter of marque.

Originally posted by: Duke87 They give Russia a "reset" button that actualy says "Implode" in Russian. They give Gordon Brown's kids a bunch of DVDs that are region I and don't work in British DVD players. He speaks ill of bonuses while his secretary ensures that legislation permits them. He bows to the Saudi King. And now they list Texas as a foreign country. So, the question is... what stupid embarassing thing is Obama and/or his administration going to do next? quote> There's still one or two faux pas to be made, after all they can't just let the world go cold turkey on US presidential embarrasments. After eight solid years of Bush going full throttle, the withdrawal needs to be slow and careful.

They had a miss competition, Miss USA I guess. Miss California said something boneheaded about gay marriage, instead of the usual boneheaded remark about the environment or world peace or about maps of The Iraq. The topic is supposed to be about whether she lost because of saying that, or due to one of the myriad other reasons one might lose a beauty pageant that can be conveniently ignored in favour of shedding some crocodile tears over Her Freedom of Speech. It's a miss competition. What can you expect, other than inane nonsense like this, to come out of it? A practical guide for faster than light travel? A road map to eternal world peace and happiness for all? But, as your friendly neighbourhood bookmaker, I will now accept bets on how long it will take before someone makes a post linking this to: "a slippery slope", "political correctness gone mad"or "the rise of the socialist/fascist/atheist/homosexual state".

Originally posted by: Duke87 quote>

Ah, finally an overview. Very pretty.

Cool idea, looking forward for more.

Moved from Simcity Societies to Simcity 4 General Discussion. I think you mean smoncrie's hole digging lots: https://www.simtropolis.com/stex/details.cfm?id=3599

Originally posted by: hym Originally posted by: JanYpe Because the pirates are inclined to keep everyone alive and intact to make sure they get paid.quote> That doesn't exactly make you not endangered. (They are at risk of physical harm, so by definition, they are endangered.)quote> No one was saying they were perfectly safe, this was about actions by the crew that would endanger lives or cargo, like grbac80 said. Opening fire, with whatever the rate of success, would be likely to put a crew in more danger than the present situation. Ignoring the stereotypes, this is missing a couple of key points. First, barring the sailors being forced to work for the company against their will, they have the ability to object to traveling through pirate infested waters. If the company doesn't want to change operations out of the area, they have the ability to leave if it bothers them enough.quote> Please do pardon the stereotype, just wanted to outdo Duke's post on the silliness level. Second, the free market often finds solutions that goverments don't. So while it's silly to think that the free market can solve everything, it is also silly to discount the ability of individuals that see an opportunity for advancement. quote> All true. The thing to remember here is that this piracy is not new, or limited to this area. (South East Asia for one is another pirate affected area) Private initiatives have not come up as a solution, because presumably they aren't cost effective. And issuing letters of marque is just so staggeringly out of date and harebrained that it could only have come as a Ron Paul idea. Originally posted by: Duke87 Originally posted by: JanYpe Yea, it probably has nothing at all to do with how limited a defense untrained sailors could put up against these pirates,quote> Better than no defense. quote> Not shooting back: Sailors dead from RPGs to the face: 0 Shooting back: Sailors dead from RPGs to the face: Lots. How is this better again? You don't need to kill them all, just enough so that the rest get the message that what they're doing ain't gonna work. Which stops the piracy and thus in the long run is better.quote> It does not stop piracy, it will just make them switch to more violent tactics. You can't stop a widespread problem like this by arming individual ships and ignoring the root problems, no matter how much you beat your chest about blowing 'em up to stop piracy.

Originally posted by: Barbarossa Just curious... why aren' t the sailors and the ship considered endangered from the onset?quote> Because the pirates are inclined to keep everyone alive and intact to make sure they get paid. Originally posted by: Duke87 Getting kidnapped and paying a ransom is preferable to returning fire since that way no one gets killed. Those poor innocent pirates, we just can't be firing weapons at them. It's so uncivilized. Why, we'd be no better than them if we resorted to criminal acts like that! quote> Yea, it probably has nothing at all to do with how limited a defense untrained sailors could put up against these pirates, or with how much more likely these pirates would be to start killing sailors in order to take over a ship or to force compliance out of the others. Nope, can´t be that at all. How dare they want to live anyway. By god that oil must go through, come hell or high water! The risk of killing a few more sailors than necessary doesn´t outweigh the risk of Cletus and Billy-Bob running out of gas for their trucks. Now let's get those letters of marque out the door, the free market will solve this one in a jiffy.

Originally posted by: Boggy1 Hang on, forgive me if I am confused, but why a Tea Party? In my mind a 'Tea Party' is a group of old ladies getting together to drink tea and eat biscuits and discuss last Sundays church service. I'm sure that's not what these protesters are doing. It just seems bizarre to call it a 'Tea Party', which sounds so tame. Any reason?quote> One guy had a glance at a history book, saw the words "taxation" and "tea party" and they all latched on to that like a lamprey, in a desperate attempt to attach some historical dignity to their dubious cause. Originally posted by: Merlin of Flyote Do I get this right:- The Americans are Revolting.quote> No no, most are lovely people once you get to know them. Originally posted by: Patricius Maximus I had come to the conclusion, a few weeks beforehand, that both Bush and Obama are fascists, or at the very least have fascist leanings. Bush happened to be a non-economic fascist most of his term and Obama is merely completing the economic part of the equation, all the while keeping his secret police (the NSA) and trying to keep absolute power to imprison anyone in the world without charges. What difference does it make if one masquerades as a conservative, and one masquerades as a liberal? quote> The NSA has been around since the fifties, and is a fairly important component of your intelligence gathering capability. They're not simply Bush's secret police, they can't simply be disbanded. And please do not throw around the label fascist when you're merely talking about authoritarian sides to their policy, it's inaccurate and lacks perspective. Originally posted by: Cheese89 When Republicans are in power, Democrats hold huge rallies and Republicans criticize them for it. When Democrats are in power, Republicans hold huge rallies and Democrats criticize them for it. America is hardly revolting... we're just vocal when we don't agree with the government. quote> I thought comparing Bush to Hitler was about as silly as it could get. But it seems Obama's opponents are clearly reaching for new heights. Never underestimate the lengths your guys will go to to be vocal I guess.

Originally posted by: Duke87 "From now on, if we capture foreign ships and their respective countries try to attack us, we will kill them (the hostages)," Jamac Habeb, a 30-year-old pirate, told the Associated Press from one of Somalia's piracy hubs, Eyl. "(U.S. forces have) become our No. 1 enemy."quote> So, let me get this straight... a reporter was talking directly to a pirate, and even got his name... but (at least we may presume) did not turn him in to the authorities? That's not right.quote> From the phrasing it looks more likely that they didn´t speak directly, but on the phone. It doesn´t strike me as a good idea for a reporter to show up on the doorstep of a bunch of guys who make their money from ransoming people and cargo, just to get a comment on a story. And you have to wonder how much value an individual pirate like that has. We already knew this Eyl place is a piracy hub, so there´s no point in nabbing a pirate to get the location of their secret treasure trove or operating base. His name is nice to have if you want to convict someone, but for that you´d also need evidence that´s stronger than a random reporter´s hearsay. Besides, what authorities should he go to? Somalia doesn't have much in the way of authorities, since it's been in civil war since '91. To the US government? You can't exactly write up a warrant and get the guy in handcuffs. And a military operation against a single port or group of pirates would be equal parts costly and pointless.

Vive le roi. Good to see you back in here, hope your coming year doesn't see you with as many problems and troubles as the last one.

Congratulations you two, well done.

I don

Originally posted by: manticorefan Originally posted by: hym {reply}quote> Originally posted by: Boggy1{text} quote> Even before British oppression of the colonies, there were the circumstances that brought the Pilgrims here in the first place, religious persecution. From Torquemada's Inquisition to the massacre of the Huguenots, Europe had a real problem with slaughtering those of religions that differed from state-established religions. Bloody Mary, her sister Elizabeth, and James I all persecuted certain Christian groups within England. The constant harassment and even torture of the Scrooby congregation finally initiated their departure for Holland, where they discovered they weren't out of James I's reach. Thus, they set out for America. Where all this is leading is that, this nation was founded from the very beginning by those who could not trust government to do right by them, or restrain itself from persecuting or murdering their families. quote> That's a lovely bit of national mythos, but you really can't take a peek at the 1600s like that and claim continuity. How were the Pilgrims still in James I's reach while in Leiden? Surely their economic prospects, the group becoming less cohesive and orthodox through acculturation and the threat of the Dutch war with Spain renewing were the more direct reasons for packing up and leaving for the colonies.

Picked up Catch 22, The Name of the Rose and Jules Verne's The Mysterious Island from the bookstore for next to nothing today. Can't start until finals are done of course.

Originally posted by: Duke87 My understanding is that a value added tax is essentially just a more complicated version of a sales tax. The exact method of collection is different, but the effect to the end consumer is the same. That, and Value Added Tax is always included in the price on the price tag, whereas sales tax typically is not. In Connecticut, the sales tax rate is 6%. So, if I go into McDonalds and buy something off the dollar menu (price = 99¢, when it gets rung up at the register I'll actually have to pay $1.05. The one key place that comes to mind where sales taxes are typically included in the price is at movie theaters. That $10.00 movie ticket will only cost you $10.00, not $10.60. The sales tax is included; the actual price of the ticket sans tax is $9.43. Otherwise, you will sometimes see prices like "$3.75 +tax" (with "+tax" in considerably smaller lettering, of course...), though not always. And, very few goods are ever exempt from sales tax. Though it varies from state to state, sales tax being a state thing, not a federal thing.quote> So since you inevitably pay it anyway, why is your sales tax not included in the price tag? Which, actually brings me to a question: that value added tax. Where does it go? The national government? The government of England, Scotland, Wales, or Northern Ireland? The government of the county? Of the municiplaity? Some to each? quote> This might vary from country to country, but the main chunk of the VAT (BTW here) ends up in the wallet of the national government, with a small percentage of it being transferred to make up the budget of the EU. In the Netherlands, according to the national statistics bureau, the VAT has become the largest source of tax income for the national government, accounting for 32% of the total tax income over 2007. I like your new icon.

Nooo, I only have 15m2 and I´ll never find enough chairs for all the guests. Oh, april fools. I knew that.

I like your parks/gardens with the flowing paths, looks very nice.

Nice to see the fishing port expand. The showboat goes well with the atmosphere of your region too. Looking forward to seeing the towns.