News Stories

[Xellos-_^]

Originally Posted by Ithekro

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/45240250...-more_politics

Sometimes the dirty laundry can't stay hidden under the bed. But that doesn't mean you can clean it.

Nixon's grand jury testimony and other records around Watergate have been released. Over the objection of the Obama Administration (because some of those people are still alive and possibly in office). Stll doesn't tell us anything other than Nixon says those 18 and a half minutes were erased on accident (and that his was mad when he found out just how much was erased). Under oath mind you.

Did Nixon ever offered to search for those missing 18 1/2mins on the golf course?

[Ithekro]

No, but it may have been dropped on Hanoi by mistake in 1972.

[DonQuigleone]

Originally Posted by LeoXiao

Also, as long as you have a government it is by definition a little bit socialist because socialism means government intervention and to have a government you need taxes, which is intervention, which thus is socialism. So socialism is not anti-human, it's as normal as government is. The question is how much.

Socialism is not government interventionism. Interventionism is a lot older then Socialism. For instance the British government around the American Revolution were quite interventionist (after that they went Laissez Faire), but were certainly not socialist by any stretch of the imagination.

Socialism is more about Welfare, intervention is more of a side thing, and is usually more characterised by actual nationalisation of Privately owned business (as seen in Britain after WW2), which stretching "interventionism" quite a bit. Interventionism means interfering, and putting controlling laws in place (EG Americans must buy Tea from British companies and pay such and such a tax), and outright takeover.

[ganbaru]

U.S. seeks new Keystone pipeline route
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/...7A95E520111110
Such hate toward canadian oil ...

[Xellos-_^]

Originally Posted by ganbaru

U.S. seeks new Keystone pipeline route
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/...7A95E520111110
Such hate toward canadian oil ...

why is the pipeline going all the way to texas and a city with a port at that?

[Ithekro]

Quicker than shipping it out from Canada, plus Texas seems to have easier access to the trade ports that oil might be exported.

[SeijiSensei]

My understanding is that they want to ship the oil to the Gulf coast because that's where most of the North American refinery capacity is located. If it were up to me, I'd tell the Canadians to ship it to British Columbia and build their own refineries. Most of the products are destined for foreign consumers like China. Wouldn't it be easier to ship the oil from Vancouver to China than from Galveston?

What makes this project even more disturbing is that the State Department has jurisdiction over the environmental assessments. At one time the responsibility for reviewing the pipeline was concentrated in one inexperienced young attorney at State with no scientific training. Just because it crosses an international border, State can, and has, told more capable agencies like the EPA to bugger off. The cronyism apparent in the emails from State that were extracted by a FOIA request is disgusting.

Here's a convenient compilation of articles from the Times about this project.

[Solace]

Originally Posted by ganbaru

U.S. seeks new Keystone pipeline route
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/...7A95E520111110
Such hate toward canadian oil ...

Because tar sand is a terrible waste of energy and resources. It causes more environmental damage than "traditional" crude oil because the process for extracting and refining it requires tremendous resources and energy for what you end up with. That's assuming that nothing goes wrong of course, like a spill. There's of course the human costs too, both in jobs and health. The real kicker is that you need fresh water to refine the sand. The world may be mostly water, but fresh water is in much shorter supply and burdened with increasing demand. There are already problems with fresh water shortages around the world because our socioeconomic systems barely give our resources time to rest and rebuild.

It's likely people who support such a thing have either never heard of the concept of NEG (net energy gain), or EROI (Energy return on investment) or they simply do not care. My bet is on the latter.

Drill baby, drill.

[ganbaru]

Originally Posted by Solace

It's likely people who support such a thing have either never heard of the concept of NEG (net energy gain), or EROI (Energy return on investment) or they simply do not care. My bet is on the latter.

Drill baby, drill.

They care... about the money. With the tar sand, Alberta is now a rich province, and the Conservator have some strong roots there.

[LeoXiao]

Originally Posted by DonQuigleone

Socialism is not government interventionism. Interventionism is a lot older then Socialism. For instance the British government around the American Revolution were quite interventionist (after that they went Laissez Faire), but were certainly not socialist by any stretch of the imagination.

Socialism is more about Welfare, intervention is more of a side thing, and is usually more characterised by actual nationalisation of Privately owned business (as seen in Britain after WW2), which stretching "interventionism" quite a bit. Interventionism means interfering, and putting controlling laws in place (EG Americans must buy Tea from British companies and pay such and such a tax), and outright takeover.

Well yes it's a bit fuzzy but technically even if you use welfare as a measure, the kings of old times claimed the right to rule which they believed to be in the interest of the people, which is a kind of antiquated welfare. I know that isn't socialism but the idea is to point out that these things don't really have clear-cut definitions.

A Chinese girl I was talking to yesterday told me that Japan and the West counted as "capitalist countries" whereas China was a "socialist" country. She then went on to explain how "capitalist" meant to her "individualistic" while "socialism" meant "collective". I don't quite agree with her but it's an interesting way of looking at it.

[DonQuigleone]

Originally Posted by LeoXiao

Well yes it's a bit fuzzy but technically even if you use welfare as a measure, the kings of old times claimed the right to rule which they believed to be in the interest of the people, which is a kind of antiquated welfare. I know that isn't socialism but the idea is to point out that these things don't really have clear-cut definitions.

A Chinese girl I was talking to yesterday told me that Japan and the West counted as "capitalist countries" whereas China was a "socialist" country. She then went on to explain how "capitalist" meant to her "individualistic" while "socialism" meant "collective". I don't quite agree with her but it's an interesting way of looking at it.

It's all too complex too sum things up in simple phrases.

Suffice to say, people can argue for hours over simple terminology...

[GundamFan0083]

Originally Posted by Sugetsu

Thus it is pointless to even to bother to stamp a label on them. Capitalism, socialism, communism and all else are deep down the same thing; a profit driven system that needs to go.

Well I can't argue against that.
All are, in one way or another, profit or power driven.
Power can come from profit, and profit certainly comes from attaining power.

Originally Posted by LeoXiao

WTF? Where do those 60 million USSR deaths come from? The accepted figure is around 30 million tops for Stalin's era, and after WW2 the USSR did not engage in massive democide, having been de-Stalinized. As for China, 35-40 million died in the Great Leap Forward famine alone, there's still at least a couple tens of millions killed or driven to suicide in the Cultural Revolution and various other campaigns.

You'd have to ask the University of Hawaii about the study.
They used R.J. Rummel's book Lethal Politics: Soviet Government and Mass Murder Since 1917 as the primary source for the USSR figures.

[Tom Bombadil]

China marks 'Super Singles Day' with marriage rush

Forget Valentine's day, here comes the bachelor's day!

"Singles Day" or "Bachelors Day" is thought to have first been marked in the 1990s by male university students.

They celebrated it on 11 November as the date contains only the number one, which can mean "bare sticks" in Chinese and refer to bachelors.

This year's event is even more significant as it falls on 11/11/11, which happens every 100 years

So, for the animesuki-ers who are still single, happy super bachelor's day.

光棍节快乐。

[ganbaru]

And what are we supposed to do in such day ?

[Vexx]

Originally Posted by ganbaru

And what are we supposed to do in such day ?

Either go drinking in sorrow or go drinking to thank the gods depending on your mood

[Xellos-_^]

Originally Posted by ganbaru

And what are we supposed to do in such day ?

watch porn

[sa547]

Originally Posted by Xellos-_^

watch porn

He hit the head of the nail with that one.

I'd rather be girl-watching at the local mall.

[aohige]

Originally Posted by Vexx

Either go drinking in sorrow or go drinking to thank the gods depending on your mood

Originally Posted by Xellos-_^

watch porn

..................wait, how is this any different than any other day of my life?

[DonQuigleone]

Originally Posted by aohige

..................wait, how is this any different than any other day of my life?

Do both at the same time?

[Ithekro]

But then it would be nothing special, thus not worthy of a "holiday".