I normally don't talk about my personal relationships.
Why do you love God?
- Thread starter NDS
- Start date
And I understand Why you disagree.
I just don't think the world condition is better for enough people. Very Few enjoy the benefits of the modern age.
Half the world — nearly three billion people — live on less than two dollars a day.Source 1
More than 80 percent of the world’s population lives in countries where income differentials are widening.Source 2
The poorest 40 percent of the world’s population accounts for 5 percent of global income. The richest 20 percent accounts for three-quarters of world income.Source 3
According to UNICEF, 26,500-30,000 children die each day due to poverty. And they “die quietly in some of the poorest villages on earth, far removed from the scrutiny and the conscience of the world. Being meek and weak in life makes these dying multitudes even more invisible in death.”Source 4
You claim to love freedom of choice. TODAY we have free choice. YEARS AGO free choice was almost nonexistant. So how the hell can you claim that our wrong choices have led to a much better and more free world than ever before?
If any of these stats are true, then it's nothing to cheer about.
There is one...reason
but I don't think it would satisfy you either.
You're probably one of the few that even know it's Yao Ming.
But the only similarity between myself and Yao Ming is that we've both been to his restruant on Westhimer.
LOL, okay.
All those stats you just gave, I guarantee you it was hundreds of times worse than that 500 years ago.
Back in the day, when you got a disease you just died. Now we have medicines and are getting very close to cureing cancer. Ya, I think I'd rather live in today's day than back in the day.
Apparently, you'd rather live in an era where you just die when you get sick, and where you live under dictators and monarchs who don't allow you freedom of choice. Funny how you love freedom of choice, but would rather live in a society where you have none...
lightgigantic said:
Not true. As I mentioned, we have grown from a pure monarchy/dictatorship/socialist world to more a predominanty democratic world. Is that technology? Nope.
LG, would you rather live in a dictatorship, forced to serve one God and have one religion? Or would you rather be free in a democratic society where you can practice any religion. I think I know your answer to that. So yes, we are way more free and better off today.
And also, greater technology means higher standard of living. So ya, I'd consider that an improvement.
The precentage of the population would be higher. However in terms of pure numbers....more people die everyday in this century than ever have before. More people died in the World Wars than ever died in any previous war. And it's just because there is more than 6 billion people on the planet.
Life has gotten good for you...but what about the other 80%
Life on Earth is more elitest now than it was in feudal systems and monarchies.
Back then NDS, the governments couldn't control everything. you could still find a patch a land and grow your own food...hunt and live off the land. Not anymore. With every piece of land owned...you're always on someones land, and every land has a millitary and most of the governements that own the land and the military aren't doing anything for the people who live on that land.
they have no choice but to starve. Starvation on this scale has never happend before.
What!!! What country do you live in??? In the U.S., where I live, none of that is true. If you buy land, it's yours. You can do whatever the hell you want on it. You can start your own business and make tons of money and the government can only take a certain portion of it. The government is much smaller in the U.S. than any other country, which is how it should be. Let the people and the market decide what's best for people. Not the gov.
China has opened their trade barriers more and more in recent years and has turned more and more to capitalism and look how much their standard of living is improving. India is growing rapidly as well as it becomes more developed like the U.S.
Basically, back in the day, there was ZERO countries like the U.S.A., which to me is the standard for the best country this world has right now. Even though it's not perfect, it's the best we have at this point. Now, we have many countries like us and 200 years from now I see a world dominated by democracy, freedom, and small government.
I know you all hate Bush here, but because of U.S.A Iraq is now a free country. Before, they were ruled by a brutal dictator WHO DIDN'T EVEN LET WOMEN WALK OUTSIDE BY THEMSELVES!!! He would torture and kill masses of people. Now they are free.
Our victory in turning Iraq into a democracy should be a GIANT SYMBOL of how far humanity has come.
Apparently you and LG would rather have a world full of brutal dictators and monarchs with countries which have massive inflation and horrible economies than a free, democratic, capitalist country where THE PEOPLE are free to believe what they want, do what they want, and succeed as they want.
Personally, I'm for the latter.
Last edited:
3 Major Ways the World is Better Off Today
1. More Democracy/Freedom of Religion/Freedom in General - We are a way more democratic, free market, free choice world than ever before. More Freedom = Better. Common guys, this one's a no brainer.
2. Much More Stable and Growing Economies Due to the development of Central Banks - the concept of a central bank was only recently developed in the last couple hundred years. It hasn't even been perfected yet, but today countries like the USA and the European Union now can boast generally stable and constantly growing economies and standard of living with much lower and stable inflation. Back then, with no central banks, the government was not accountible and would print more and more money until it was worth nothing and everyone starved, suffered, and died. Do you really think they were better off? LOL.
3. Better Medicines - Back then, you got sick and died. Now you don't. The level of medicine we have today is TRULY AMAZING.
There are literally hundreds more reasons, but these are three I came up with off the top of my head.
NO ONE CAN REFUTE THE ABOVE 3 REASONS.
And, ya, Saquist, sure the WHOLE world hasn't caught up to America's greatness, level of freedom, and high standard of living yet. But give it time. They will.
Look at the European Union, which basically acts like a country. They now have a central bank, and have really progressed. In due time, the world will catch up.
1. More Democracy/Freedom of Religion/Freedom in General - We are a way more democratic, free market, free choice world than ever before. More Freedom = Better. Common guys, this one's a no brainer.
2. Much More Stable and Growing Economies Due to the development of Central Banks - the concept of a central bank was only recently developed in the last couple hundred years. It hasn't even been perfected yet, but today countries like the USA and the European Union now can boast generally stable and constantly growing economies and standard of living with much lower and stable inflation. Back then, with no central banks, the government was not accountible and would print more and more money until it was worth nothing and everyone starved, suffered, and died. Do you really think they were better off? LOL.
3. Better Medicines - Back then, you got sick and died. Now you don't. The level of medicine we have today is TRULY AMAZING.
There are literally hundreds more reasons, but these are three I came up with off the top of my head.
NO ONE CAN REFUTE THE ABOVE 3 REASONS.
And, ya, Saquist, sure the WHOLE world hasn't caught up to America's greatness, level of freedom, and high standard of living yet. But give it time. They will.
Look at the European Union, which basically acts like a country. They now have a central bank, and have really progressed. In due time, the world will catch up.
Last edited:
Actually, that's what the world is like right now. Well, most of it anyway. You totally miss the point that as a nation of 300 million, the US makes up very little of the 6 billion other people out there. Even if you say 1 billion people live nice lives in the West, then that leaves another 5 billion people with brutal dictators, etc.
Roman, how many democracies with checks and balances coupled with a central bank were there about 500 years ago.
Answer: 0
So ya, Roman, lightgigantic, Saquist sorry, the world is still really ****ing shitty. But guess what guys, IT HAS IMPROVED, A LOT. Holy Shit, lighten up and show a little optimism. The world is actually getting better as hard as that is to believe.
Hey Roman, Iraq was a brutal dictatorship about 10 years ago. WHAT IS IT NOW?
Answer: 0
So ya, Roman, lightgigantic, Saquist sorry, the world is still really ****ing shitty. But guess what guys, IT HAS IMPROVED, A LOT. Holy Shit, lighten up and show a little optimism. The world is actually getting better as hard as that is to believe.
Hey Roman, Iraq was a brutal dictatorship about 10 years ago. WHAT IS IT NOW?
It wasn't easy, i'll give you that.
However, as i said, it's all relative. We have my love. But this love is reflected upon, so there are two directionalities are involved. God's love is rememdial next to our ability to understand it, so we find that the three rules amplify:
1) I love God
2) God loves me///
3) So... i Love God as much as He/She Loves me.
There is the three. From my prospectus anyway.
:bugeye:You've never heard of imminent domain have you?
Ultimately all land belongs to the country you live on. If it wasn't so then you wouldn't have to pay taxes, right?
True, but China is still a huge oppressor to human rights.
but was the standard of the average living better or worse...
It's worse today. More people living in squauler and poverty. It's just not enough we satisfy 350 million people in one country. Poverty is still a problem here. The stats say so...if you believe them.
Have you seen the Iraqi death toll?
LONDON - Deaths of Iraqis have soared to 100,000 above normal since the Iraq war mainly due violence and many of the victims have been women and children, public health experts from the United States said Thursday.
That's as of TODAY....wow.
It really doesn't sound or look like better.
I just can't follow you here.
I wouldn't say apparently but if you haven't noticed the world is full of dictators.
We've leave Bush out this for now.
What about the Russian President, he's puttin a stomp on religion again in Russia, disolving churchers, so is France. China monitors it's internet for religious key worlds among other things
And as of 2006...
The Western Favourite
Dictators: Islam's man of action
Ziauddin Sardar on Pervez Musharraf of Pakistan
www.newstatesman.com/200609040030
The Dictator on Europe's Doorstep
Dictators: Dreaming of the USSR
Andrey Kurkov on Alexander Lukashenko of Belarus
www.newstatesman.com/200609040031
The Religious Authority
Dictators: Reform and the mullahs
Ali M Ansari on Ayatollah Ali Khamenei of Iran
www.newstatesman.com/200609040032
The Nuclear Threat
Dictators: The depths of evil
Jasper Becker on Kim Jong-il of North Korea
www.newstatesman.com/200609040033
The Personality Cult Leader
Dictators: Central Asia's new idol
Lucy Ash on Saparmurat Niyazov of Turkmenistan
www.newstatesman.com/200609040034
The Mandarin
Dictators: Between the Party and the markets
Xiao Jia Gu on Hu Jintao of China
www.newstatesman.com/200609040035
The Oil Profiteer
Dictators: Africa's brutal secret
Hector Rodrigues on Teodoro Obiang Nguema of Equatorial Guinea
www.newstatesman.com/200609040036
The Absolute Monarch
Dictators: Oil, torture and the west
Damian Quinn on Abdullah Ibn Abdul Aziz al-Saud of Saudi Arabia
www.newstatesman.com/200609040037
The Modernising Sheik
Dictators: Meet the CEO, Dubai Inc
William Wallis on Sheikh Mohammed bin Rashid Al Maktoum of Dubai
www.newstatesman.com/200609040038
The Last Latin Autocrat
Dictators: Goodbye to all that
Ben Davies on Alfredo Stroessner, former leader of Paraguay
www.newstatesman.com/200609040039
To read the nominated worst despots visit our dictators survey at www.newstatesman.com/dictators
Nearly 17 years after the collapse of the Berlin Wall there is still no shortage of dictators casting their shadows across the world. This special issue takes a look at 10 current despots.
Worst for freedom of speech
1 Kim Jong-il, North Korea
2 Isaias Afewerki, Eritrea
3 Saparmurat Niyazov, Turkmenistan
4 Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Iran
5 Senior General Than Shwe, Burma
Source: Reporters Without Borders' press freedom index 2005
Most corrupt
1 Yoweri Museveni, Uganda
2 Saparmurat Niyazov, Turkmenistan
3 Hu Jintao, China
4 Raul/Fidel Castro, Cuba
=5 Laurent Gbagbo, Ivory Coast
=5 José Eduardo dos Santos, Angola
Source: Transparency International annual report 2004. This is not a list of the most personally corrupt dictators, but a list of how much each country's population perceives corruption in government
Largest armies (active troops)
1 China 2,255,000
2 North Korea 1,106,000
3 Pakistan 619,000
4 Iran 420,000
5 Burma 375,000
Sources: Centre for Strategic and International Studies and International Institute for Strategic Studies
Military spending as percentage of GDP
1 Eritrea - 17.7
2 North Korea - 12.5 (estimate)
3 Jordan - 11.4
4 Oman - 11.4
5 Qatar - 10
Source: CIA World Factbook. GDP figures for North Korea are estimates
Longest in power (in years):
1 Cuba: Fidel Castro - 47
2 Libya: Muammar al-Gaddafi - 37
3 Gabon: Omar Bongo - 31
4 Equatorial Guinea: Teodoro Obiang Nguema - 27
5 Angola: José Eduardo dos Santos - 27
It's abit outdated now buy the world is still FULL of Dictators...and they're creating more problems now than before. Now thanks to easy of information and technology and scientist for hire world wide annhilation is more likely.
I no that's the worse case scenario but dude....
Come on NDS, only the 20th century has seen the threat of the destruction of the entire world....coupled with the poverty, the crime rate and the dictators...the destruction of the Biosphere, mass extinctions....and mass executions....It's almost 80% worse than it was. (strangely enough)
Believe me I know where you're coming from. It's idealistic and to some extent true what you're saying but...the stats paint a pretty bleak picture for the last two centuries than you do.
NDS
Aside from this, there is the issue whether this is a good way to go about securing the bare necessities of life in general ... or the old limitations of raja guna (mode of passion) – namely immediate happiness at the cost of long term misery. For instance, now I have the convenience of turning on a tap to get my water. However in many cities of the world, it is not suitable for drinking because there are various industries (like say the production of plumbing faucets etc) that contaminate the supply. The same goes for things like air and food.
What do you think of the WHO’s prediction of the greatest challenge to world health – mental disease?
How do you suppose that developed?
Actually the best mode for civilization is one based on an agrarian economy – nomadic society doesn’t allow for diversity and industrial civilization is simply artificial .... and anything done artificially (or in the mode of passion) will ultimately fail
Is this the standard for greatness?
These first two are simply issues of time place and circumstance. When social unity is degenerated (prevalent divorce, etc), the people likely to assume power are possessed of questionable dispositions, when the means of production are mostly industrial, etc etc then you have a ripe situation for the implementation of democracy, central banks etc.
Aside from this, there is the issue whether this is a good way to go about securing the bare necessities of life in general ... or the old limitations of raja guna (mode of passion) – namely immediate happiness at the cost of long term misery. For instance, now I have the convenience of turning on a tap to get my water. However in many cities of the world, it is not suitable for drinking because there are various industries (like say the production of plumbing faucets etc) that contaminate the supply. The same goes for things like air and food.
Now you don’t get sick and die?
What do you think of the WHO’s prediction of the greatest challenge to world health – mental disease?
How do you suppose that developed?
Actually the best mode for civilization is one based on an agrarian economy – nomadic society doesn’t allow for diversity and industrial civilization is simply artificial .... and anything done artificially (or in the mode of passion) will ultimately fail
Materially speaking there is always something good and something bad. I mean in some ways I am sure that the rest of the world wishes America would catch up on a few things
So from a capitalist standpoint – great! Full marks! – but there is the issue whether there are other important standards outside of capitalism. For instance all that it requires in most American cities for a riot to take place is for the power to go off for several days.
Is this the standard for greatness?
Yes, it is actually. I'd rather be rioting over power, than bread.
Thwe point is I guess, today has it's advantages and disadvantages. You've all provided some good evidence proving that it's worse off, and I've provided evidence proving it's better off.
You're right LG, in terms of long-term happiness, today is not necesarily better. And you're also right Saquist, better weapon technology means higher likelihood of world annhiliation. And that is a real problem. You guys make valid points, but aside from the mental illness thing and the threat of world annhilation, I see a real bright future ahead (LOL, I know, that sounds rediculous).
But if your not mentally ill, and could care less about world annhilation (or just aren't worried about it), then this is by far the best time to live in, period. I guess it all just depends on perspective.
Oh, by the way. All those stats you guys gave, like the starvation ones, suffering ones, etc. tends to show that God does not love us.
You said it yourself LG. All the badness in this world is caused by man. And God let it all happen while he sat back on his high chair and didn't do anything. God has sat back and let us create one shitty, suffer filled world. I'm sure it's all for a reason, and because he loves us though right.
What more loving parent is there than one who throws their children out into the wilderness and says, GOOD LUCK.
You said it yourself LG. All the badness in this world is caused by man. And God let it all happen while he sat back on his high chair and didn't do anything. God has sat back and let us create one shitty, suffer filled world. I'm sure it's all for a reason, and because he loves us though right.
What more loving parent is there than one who throws their children out into the wilderness and says, GOOD LUCK.
Last edited:
there is the option of not rioting at all however
I mean you can see a general difference between how india has responded to shortages of something and how africa has ... and I am pretty sure you can fit the states somewhere in there too
not caring about world annihilation seems like a good way to develop a mental illness
Why there are difficulties understanding notions of service?
In my estimation, a lot has to do with some negative connotations to the words "servant", "service" that seem prevalent in the Western culture.
According to those connotations, a "servant" is supposed to be unhappy, envious of the master, a second-class person, hating his job, always in fear of losing their job, secretly spitting into the master's food or sleeping in their bed when the master is away, dispensible, replacable, to be hated and despised and believing they deserve it.
IOW, "free and worthy" people do not have to serve; but if one has to serve, then one is not "free and worthy".
Also, anyone who is happy to do what is considered "service" is not rarely viewed as a "happy loser". There is a stereotype here in the West that people who are nice to all and who are doing others many favors, are in fact losers whose lives are meaningless.
Although any Wsterner who has ever tried to get ahead in the business world or in politics, knows very well how important it is to be nice and to do favors.
Also, there is the important topic of reciprocation.
Robert Cialdini in the now standard reference work Influence. The Psychology of Persuasion lists reciprocation as a weapon of influence; namely, when someone does us a favor, we feel obligated to return it. This is a normal and important rule to make a complex society function. But this rule can also be exploited, as marketers and manipulators know very well. They know that if you want someone to comply with your request, it is useful to first give them an uninvited small gift - such as free samples of food or other free products that we are often offered at stores. The person will then feel compelled (because of the reciprocation rule which is firmly set in their mind and which they may not even be aware of) to buy something even if they don't need it (which costs more than the gift).
I think many people have very negative experiences with the rule of reciprocation being exploited where they have been duped into returning with great favors for something much smaller. So this is one possible reason they are automatically alarmed when reciprocation comes up.
The other issue with reciprocation is that in order to reciprocate, and to know when and on what grounds to refuse a reciprocation, and to recognize exploitation of the rule of reciprocation, is that in order to do so, one must have clearly set priorities and values in life, down to the smallest detail. Many people do not have their priorities and values set like that - and many people are willing to take advantage of this.
Robert Cialdini in the now standard reference work Influence. The Psychology of Persuasion lists reciprocation as a weapon of influence; namely, when someone does us a favor, we feel obligated to return it. This is a normal and important rule to make a complex society function. But this rule can also be exploited, as marketers and manipulators know very well. They know that if you want someone to comply with your request, it is useful to first give them an uninvited small gift - such as free samples of food or other free products that we are often offered at stores. The person will then feel compelled (because of the reciprocation rule which is firmly set in their mind and which they may not even be aware of) to buy something even if they don't need it (which costs more than the gift).
I think many people have very negative experiences with the rule of reciprocation being exploited where they have been duped into returning with great favors for something much smaller. So this is one possible reason they are automatically alarmed when reciprocation comes up.
The other issue with reciprocation is that in order to reciprocate, and to know when and on what grounds to refuse a reciprocation, and to recognize exploitation of the rule of reciprocation, is that in order to do so, one must have clearly set priorities and values in life, down to the smallest detail. Many people do not have their priorities and values set like that - and many people are willing to take advantage of this.