| Most Recent Messages of Each Discussion |
Created by |
cultural talkin
hallo!ich bin von Spanien UND MOCHTE viel viel deutsch und Englisch üben!Ich bin nicht Gold Mitglied aber ich kann dir atworten!
|
Language pair: English; German
|
|
Virginia
September 30, 2012
# Msgs: 1
|
Re:Re:Re:Re:War...
Katie, if you had a doctor and you were sick, and you went to him for treatment and he ended up making foolish decisions that nearly cost you your life, and that any first year med student could have advised against, would you say, "Well, he's a DOCTOR, he obviously had to take tests and the Hypocratic Oath, I can't be angry at him because I couldn't be a doctor?" I should certainly hope not; if people did that, then we would have no standards to hold anyone to. Instead, your response should be to seek better treatment and file a malpractice suit.
Just because I am not qualified to be the President, does not mean I am not qualified to realize that the President has made dozens of errors and destroyed the Constitution. As though the War in Iraq is not bad enough, he has also restricted habeas corpus and the right against cruel and unusual punishment. Sure, he may be doing the best job he can; but the fact remains he is NOT doing well enough. If all the fools in the world were entrusted with important positions and excuses made for them with the phrase 'he's doing the best we can'- the world would be going to Hades in a handbasket.
Then again, it very well might be.
|
Language pair: English; German
|
|
TeNeal
January 6, 2008
# Msgs: 3
Latest: January 6, 2008
|
Re:Re:Re:Re:u.s president
I will try to bring my "french personal view" about the current US president.
I think that the ideology , the neoconservatism, who is the base to all of these politics is the new humanism.. In the world where we live,defend freedom and the right for everyone to can dispose of this own natural freedom is an imperative. That's the reason why i support the action of President Bush. Ok, a lot of things (and strong debate)could be made about the iraq conflict, but the philosophy of action is right in my opinion.
Since Bush has got the president place, most people in France like criticized the Us politics..It's just the result of an imcomprehension of currents international issues and a kind of jealousy behind the isolationism that can lead France in secession..
I would like to say my positive opinion about current american representant of diplomacy Condoleza Rice. She can make an excellent President..Wait and see!
|
Language pair: English; German
|
|
Pierre
July 29, 2006
# Msgs: 2
Latest: July 29, 2006
|
Re:Re:Re:Pure Opinion: Is America a democracy?
"Self interest governs all" The only thing that you can really count Self Interest Governs All Part 1 of 2
"Self interest governs all" means that the only thing that you can really count on is that people will do what is in their own best interests. This is the main principal behind western economics, and is also the great limiting factor that confronts us in dealing with problems that do not improve "the bottom line" for business. The classic example of this is known as "the problem of the commons."
Imagine you live in a small pastoral community where everyone raises livestock. Maybe grazing land is scarce, but we have a public "commons," a place where we can all graze our animals, so long as we are considerate and do our part in maintaining it.
Here's where the problem comes in. If we all have to share the commons--lets just say, for example, that there are ten local ranches—that means that we each enjoy about a tenth of the benefit of the commons, and are responsible for about a tenth of its upkeep. But look what happens when we start sharing it.
I may notice that I’m making fairly decent money from my livestock, but I might actually make a whole lot more if I double the size of my herd. If I do this, I double my benefit from the use of the commons without any increase at all to my cost in supporting it. Unfortunately, this is true equally for all who share the commons. You may imagine what is going to happen. Everyone is going to want to double the size of their herds, and pretty soon, we’ll all have so much livestock that we’ll all be overgrazing the commons. That’s going to ruin the grassland and make it unusable for all of us. Now, there’s going to be a big fight over who has to get rid of some of their animals, because all of us are enjoying such great benefit at such a low cost. This means that we’re all going to have to share some further expenses to provide security to ensure that everyone follows whatever we end up agreeing to as a group in order to reestablish some peaceful, sustainable way to use the commons.
See Self Interest Governs All Part 2 of 2
|
Language pair: English; German
|
|
Mark S.
June 1, 2005
# Msgs: 6
Latest: June 4, 2005
|
Re:Re:Re:Pure Opinion: Is America a democracy?
Self Interest Governs All Part 2 of 2
A similar problem occurs when it comes time to put time, money, or effort into taking care of the commons. For every, hour, say, that I put into taking care of the commons, I pay 100 percent of the time (it is all me, nobody splits that hour with me) and I enjoy only a tenth of the benefit from my efforts during that time, since I only get to use the commons a tenth of the time, or I only get to use a tenth of the commons, or whatever we have all agreed to. So the natural economics of the situation is that everybody benefits most by using the commons as much as they possibly can and contributing to its upkeep as little as they absolutely have to. It winds up being a lose-lose proposition for everyone unless you can find a group of people that are just naturally altruistic and civic minded, and wouldn’t dream of using the commons any more than they’re entitled or caring for them any less than their fair share. In real-world terms, that’s quite a difficult crowd to pull together.
In terms of our modern world and today’s politics, we have all kinds of “commons” resources that we have to share, and where these dynamics will pop up. Highly visible examples are the air, rivers and oceans, which we all depend on and all want others to help us keep clean. Natural resources, like forests, mineral deposits, and farmland. Anything that we have to share and which requires some sort of sense of responsibility in its use and management.
This may make it a whole lot easier to see why it is so difficult to work out international treaties to deal with the problems of pollution and global warming. It may also explain why public bathrooms can get so nasty.
Cheers!
Mark / Sacramento
|
Language pair: English; German
|
|
Mark S.
June 1, 2005
# Msgs: 6
Latest: June 4, 2005
|
Re:Re:Re:Pure Opinion: Is America a democracy?
"Self interest governs all" The only thing that you can really count Self Interest Governs All Part 1 of 2
"Self interest governs all" means that the only thing that you can really count on is that people will do what is in their own best interests. This is the main principal behind western economics, and is also the great limiting factor that confronts us in dealing with problems that do not improve "the bottom line" for business. The classic example of this is known as "the problem of the commons."
Imagine you live in a small pastoral community where everyone raises livestock. Maybe grazing land is scarce, but we have a public "commons," a place where we can all graze our animals, so long as we are considerate and do our part in maintaining it.
Here's where the problem comes in. If we all have to share the commons--lets just say, for example, that there are ten local ranches—that means that we each enjoy about a tenth of the benefit of the commons, and are responsible for about a tenth of its upkeep. But look what happens when we start sharing it.
I may notice that I’m making fairly decent money from my livestock, but I might actually make a whole lot more if I double the size of my herd. If I do this, I double my benefit from the use of the commons without any increase at all to my cost in supporting it. Unfortunately, this is true equally for all who share the commons. You may imagine what is going to happen. Everyone is going to want to double the size of their herds, and pretty soon, we’ll all have so much livestock that we’ll all be overgrazing the commons. That’s going to ruin the grassland and make it unusable for all of us. Now, there’s going to be a big fight over who has to get rid of some of their animals, because all of us are enjoying such great benefit at such a low cost. This means that we’re all going to have to share some further expenses to provide security to ensure that everyone follows whatever we end up agreeing to as a group in order to reestablish some peaceful, sustainable way to use the commons.
See Self Interest Governs All Part 2 of 2
on is that people will do what is in their own best interests. This is the main principal behind western economics, and is also the great limiting factor that confronts us in dealing with problems that do not improve "the bottom line" The classic example of this is known as "the problem of the commons."
Imagine you live in a small pastoral community where everyone raises livestock. Maybe grazing land is scarce, but we have a public "commons," a place where we can all graze our animals, so long as we are considerate and do our part in maintaining it.
Here's where the problem comes in. If we all have to share the commons--lets just say, for example, that there are ten local ranches. That means that we each enjoy about a tenth of the benefit of the commons, are responsible for about a tenth of its upkeep,
|
Language pair: English; German
|
|
Mark S.
June 1, 2005
# Msgs: 6
Latest: June 4, 2005
|
