You are not logged in.
Yes, we need to switch every nation to a capitalist democracy or republic, where the market responds to the wishes of the people, and the people elect their leaders.
The fundamental flaws with this system are not in the system, theyre in the education of people. People have to be properly educated to make wise choices, both politically and financially. If they are hardworking, and well educated, they can get ahead.
edit: by switch i dont mean forceably, i meant every nation should be a representative capitalism. I wasnt talking about nation building.
When you accept Fox as being unbiased, I'll take that as unbiased. Most of what I saw is bashing Bush, bashing American policy, and bashing the rest of the media.
If it's true, yeah it is kinda funny. but i doubt that, and it would still be funny if it werent true, because of the big deal thats being made of it.
come on josh, this is a joke, and you know it. please dont pretend that the government is dumb enough to do something like that.
on another note, i just burn my mp3's to cd's and listen to them on the stereo i got for my bday...
heh, i built my own PC for $500...yes, i guess it would qualify as a really fast pc (athlon 1800+ and 384 ddr), but musicmatch certainly fits the bill!
The next design will almost certainly be cheaper. For one thing, the OSP's are smaller, and from what i've seen, lifted by a single booster. they arent as complex, either. i doubt we'd make something MORE expensive as our next step. Do you really think Congress would approve it?
Hrm, well the Nazi party was molded by hitler into a wartime party, intending to be a war party, so war wouldnt be a "special circumstance" for germany.
but, what would you call the soviet union then?
No, no GRANDPARENTS. and two doctors of economics, who are my parents. And cold, hard, economic fact.
Government control of production is certainly not capitalist, at least not government control on a wide scale. This is almost counter-capitalist. Adam Smith proposed some regulation, but a good dose of laissez-faire to accompany it.
So you really dont have any facts to back yourself up, while I have first hand evidence.
Like i said, arguing with you is like a broken record, you quote the same person over and over, without being accountable for what you say, and never budging when youre shown to be wrong.
Reasonable debate is impossible.
adrian, maybe you could move some of the older posts onto a backup hard drive or server?
musicmatch or quicktime are good bets. they have other functions too. musicmatch can burn cd's for you. and it organizes your files well. and you can get radio stations.
Robert: that engine doesnt seem up to NERVA's level...and it certainly doesnt seem to be much of an improvement. I wonder just how much more we can do with NTRs.
What new materials can we use today that they didnt have back in the 60s? What new fuels, and techniques? Im sure that there is plenty of improvements we could make that would get more thrust and isp out of NTRs, and lighten the reactor itself.
quicktime and musicmatch work well. both are free, unless you want an upgrade. real one is ok, and free.
GDP is a strong, if the not the strongest, indicator of economic strength.
No, thats not so. In America, and almost all capitalist countries, we have a legal system, which protects your right to ownership. Therefore, it is your possession.
Um, government ownership and running is the same as government control. There is no difference. Germany was socialist. You are trying to pick a thread that isnt there.
i cant say. but i think it was killed, because the military would have no use for it without NASA having nuclear engines.
If it wasnt, all the better!
Er, no. Our economic influence is enough. Not being militarily everywhere is not isolationism. France, England, Russia, and China are all influential, without international bases.
What you are suggesting is that we are an empire, with only the privileged few getting a democracy. This is contradictory to our founding principles, and our constitution. Our military presence is not needed. With a global economy, dominance is not needed. In fact, dominant countries have fared worse in the past than ones who maintain a balance of power.
Read Machiavelli.
Two nations will team up on a third one in order to maintain the balance, preventing one from being too dominant. Look around the world, this is manifesting itself, from the political qualms of france and germany to the military actions of iraq and north korea. This is not to say they are justified, but it is a trend shown throughout history, and we cannot let it repeat itself.
I dont want to have a foreign policy that costs us tens of billions to be the only country to have dozens of international bases. Security is one thing, we dont have to be everywhere at once.
That breeds resentment.
So as long as we practice democracy here, despotism and tyranny are ok over there. Ah, I see, now.
No, I actually said I thought he had weapons. You might want to look back to the beginning.
What I said is that until we actually find something more than empty shells, we dont have the impetus to go to war.
I completely agree about North Korea kicking out the inspectors. But its time for you to stop being an ass and realize that we are one nation among many.
You are being the stereotypical arrogrant, ignorant Rambo American. Please realize that we are not the only country in the world. Just because you are stronger, does that mean you have to tell everyone else what to do?
So, you really are just letting your ego get the better of you, when you just showed that you were wrong to begin with?
No, I dont believe he is pure evil, but I laugh at how he blames Clinton for our troubles, and ignores how great of a president clinton was.
Here is my plan:
First, we keep the Shuttle running until its replacement is designed. After this we build 5 spaceplanes a year, and every 5 years, we update our production lines to a new model.
This way, we never have to make revolutionary and costly retooling changes to our production line, but we keep a modernized fleet.
As ships turn 15, we phase them out, as they are constantly replaced by newer, more modern ships. We dont face another problem like the Columbia. The new, cheaper designs actually save us money by making production cheaper, and keeping research current.
This allows a large, cheap fleet with state of the art technology. As Congress and the public see a successful space program, funding will increase in hopes for more. More R&D could be done, and the process could be a self-perpetuating sequence of events.
Questions, comments?
And why cant we follow these same rules? Or France? Or anyone else besides North Korea?