Praxus

Your confusing two fundmanentally different systems. What you describe is mercentalism, the system of tarrifs and trade barriers in an effort to create a massive trade surplus. Capitalism has no such premise.



It's amazing how you devote an entire paragraph to calling me and other Americans arragont but you dedicare exactly zero paragraphs to answering my simple question, which if answered would get us to the core of what we are discussing here.

Not only am I an atheist, but I am an egoist. In other words I am selfish. I believe the correct moral code is egoism; that I should do what is in my rational self-interest. What you profess is the moral code of suicide (altruism). If you followed it to it's logical conclusion you would have to offer yourself to a cannable. No man can accept this moral code consistantly if he has chosen to live. If he has chosen to live, then one needs a code to live by, and since this premise is true, we can say the only purpose of morality is to preserve and enhance ones own life (as I have stated before).



Since I do not believe in an afterlife, the only life I am concerned with is the one I am in now.

There are five fundamental parts of philosophy, resting on several axioms (i.e. Exsistance Exsists, A=A, etc...). All knowledge is hiearchially based on these axioms. This is to say, you can't know there is a flower without first knowing that reality exsists in which you have the capacity to sense there is a flower. This is what I mean.

It's interesting how you try to pervert egosim. Theft is not in ones interest, as it is is inherently self-destructive.



God damn, you are unintelligable at best. You keep insisting that there is a static ammount of wealth that the rich are keeping to themselves. There isn't. Wealth is produced, and men produce it. Just because the top 5% have a large percentage of the wealth at the moment, says nothing about how much wealth everyone else has.

An imaginary example; the poor may have had 50% of the wealth in say 1920 while the rich had 50%. Now lets say that in 1999 the poor had 5% and the rich had 95%. This in no way means that the poor got poorer and the rich got richer. What this ratio ignores, is the fact that the poor could have had their wealth quadrupled while the rich had theirs increased 20 fold. This means that they are in fact both wealthier.

Not only this, but these figures include the third and second world, where there are nations not even close to being Capitalist.


As I have demonstrated above, they also ignore reality.


Rest of it is unrelated bable.

dalem

So, who's on my side in the Great Vampire Wars? Neutrality is a poor option, as I'm sure the carnage will spill over our northern and southern borders.

My advice to Canada - dig a long trench on your side of the border and fill it with holy water. It's the only way to be sure.

-Count dale

Officer of Engineers

Actually, that would keep my #1 Daughter in during the day while I could stay up and watch her during the night. Also keeps future pesty boyfriends at bay.

__________________
Chimo

Amled

Never having been a rapacious blood-sucking capitalist, merely one of the lowly wage slaves who benefited from their endeavours. From getting a decent education and receiving low cost medical benefits while growing up in Canada, I must heed their clarion call.
Call me Rennick!
No spiders and flies if you please, the essence of neo-socialists will do quite nicely.

__________________
When we blindly adopt a religion, a political system, a literary dogma, we become automatons. We cease to grow. - Anais Nin

dalem

I can respect your decision to resist even as I prepare for your ultimate defeat.

OoE will prove to be a wily foe, of that I have no doubt.

-Count dale

Officer of Engineers

Count, I really don't see you having a chance. As soon as you bend over to bite a neck, you're screwed by the butt pluggers of Canada (Liberal Party).

dalem

Curses!

Once again I am betrayed by my luscious boy-bottom!

I feel certain that one of my fellow lifeblood-sucking American Capitalist Vampires will be able to solve this problem for us.

-Count dale

highsea

This is no problem, Count. We simply offer to build them a free missile defense system. This will cause all the liberals to rush to Ottawa to prepare their angry refusal.

(It's an old trick, but it just might work)

__________________
My baby called me up. She said- Why don't you ever take me out? Pick me up in your brand new car....You shake the short change from the old fruit jar...

Amled

Free isn’t good enough.
I’ll have you know that The Canadian Liberal Party has a reputation to maintain.

highsea

Okay, A missile defense system and Massachusetts. But that's my final offer...

Amled

Trying to fob of the alcohol-enriched blood of the Kennedy clan on to the defenceless people of your neighbour is a low blow indeed.
No way that is going to make them say:
BITE ME!!

Officer of Engineers

I don't know if Highsea is trying to use Mass as bait or trying to find homes for their butt pluggers.

Confed999

Thank you Sir, well said.

__________________
No man is free until all men are free - John Hossack
I agree completely with this Administration’s goal of a regime change in Iraq-John Kerry
even if that enforcement is mostly at the hands of the United States, a right we retain even if the Security Council fails to act-John Kerry
He may even miscalculate and slide these weapons off to terrorist groups to invite them to be a surrogate to use them against the United States. It’s the miscalculation that poses the greatest threat-John Kerry

dalem

So I can count you on the side of American Capitalistic Vampirism then?

Excellent.

Keep in mind, however, that Canada and Mexico are mere sideshows in the great American Vampire War - we must focus on the lifeblood-sucking within our own territory first.

And Vampirella, of course.

Harken to my call, O Arrogant Ones!

-Count dale

lwarmonger

Wow! I think that this is the first time we've ever agreed on anything!