United WORLD!!!

[DarkSoul]

WARNING : Oki its a serious topic so please serious answers without spams ( for K_Mihai , Kopsi , KoSaC - if you dont know what to say please dont enter here ) ...i saw in a few posts K_mihai is a smart boy so i think he has some good things to say here.....Kopsi is stupid like s**t so he only can say some stupid  ,senslles , sexual phrases and nothing more....

" When the power of Love overcomes the love of Power , the world will know peace "......

let's see who can say something smart about these words :
- Central Banck's
-Terrorism
-The greatest story ever told ( about gods , our believes and all this bulshit )


for more interest try to find and wiew the documentary movie : Swhadows of Past"  the proofs there are just incredible.....it openes the eyes .......

[DarkSoul]

1)oki lets start with believes and the gods.....lets star with Jesus Christ ..sorry but this is bulshit.....if you make some researches you see that the same story of jesus christ is repeated in history another 12-13 times ..word by word..in many countrys before his time.....THE MOST ANTIQUE IS IN EGIPT....theyr god Horus( SUN) 3000 BC long time before Jesus Christ some 3000 years.....okey lets see
Horus - Born on December 25 , born of a virgin , Star in the East , ADORNED by 3 KINGS , TEACHER at 12 , BAPTIZED/MINISTRY at 30 , 12 DISCIPLES
Jesus CHRIST - Born on December 25 , born of a virgin , Star in the East , ADORNED by 3 KINGS , TEACHER at 12 , BAPTIZED/MINISTRY at 30 , 12 DISCIPLES


Hm...so lets see its the same story.....today im a litlle tired so tomorow ill give you another 10-12 gods that are the SAME , and more then 40 with just litlle alternations before and after Jesus Christ.....


2)ooo Federal Banck's the REAL POWER AND ADMINISTRATION of evry country......here please put your answers ill explain evrything detalized tomorow why the own the country and how they rule..i wanna see some good answers


3)             "ALL THE WORLD IS A STAGE"

Terrorizm keep  the sociey unite and make them go as blind sheaps after theyr leaders ....this give to all society an Open materialization of the enemy


"Nearly all terror suspects detained are relised without charges.............but that's after they make it to the front page for you to see "

TERRORISM - 1)Most common definitions of terrorism include only those acts which are intended to create fear (terror), are perpetrated for an ideological goal (as opposed to a lone attack), and deliberately target or disregard the safety of non-combatants. Some definitions also include acts of unlawful violence and war.


                   2)Technique used by Governament to manipulate public opinion in order to further  an agenda

[Decimus]

I believe sincerly that you just jump in big tremenduous subject. why do not take more litle steps, cause an answer to your question is innevitable a book.
I dearly  recomand you
Philosophy in a Time of Terror
Dialogues with Jürgen Habermas
and Jacques Derrida to better understand the world in wich we live .

[Decimus]

btw: what the *bip* do we know movies is full inexactities as much as stories that they count for searching theyr arguments.leave populistics ideas behind.go read&see quality-certified materials.

[PYGMILIAN]

I must say 2 things First,  this can turn into a great subject (ie. No spammers or Idjits) second is that if no one tries to insult another's OPINION . BECAUSE OPINIONS ARE LIKE ASSHOLES, EVERYONES GOT ONE!!!!

   WITH THAT SAID

  On Terrorism/ lets take the root word terror. this is S>O>P> for any governing Body going back past the Egyptians. the word My be relatively new as far as written words go. But the premise of the actions have not changed Nor has the desired outcome of such acts.
  In the 20th and 21st centuries  Present day we throw the word around Like a wet noodle. Like we invented this. 
  As far as present day  (as George W.) so gently put it  The axis of evil. More bull comming from a Person truly out of touch with reality. the acts of these religious or idealogical fanatics of today are no different than when Moses went to Pharaoh <    It was a form Terrorism. granted  it has been whitewashed so many times and portrayed In this awe inspiring way .  The truth shall set you free............more to come as time permits

[k_mihai]

Fights started this morning Georgia/South Ossetia (in Caucasus, between Caspian and Black Sea). Georgia send army in a surprise attack (good move, people were concentrated on Olympic games, except the ones who have reserves against China`s policy in Tibet, which i share) against the break-away region of Southern Ossetia, who are backed by Russia (Northern Ossetia is in Russia), while Georgian authorities are mainly US backed. Russian planes were his and they started moving tanks in South Ossetia (where a lot of people have Russian citizenship), while Georgians were assailing the capital.

Georgia was part of Soviet Union, and when that broke away, Russia, supported separatists in Abhazia, Adjaria and South Ossetia, and send forces to other regions of that country.  A new president in Georgia, Mikhail Saakashvili regained control of Adjaria and sent home some of the Russian forces. Ofc, a major oil&gas pipeline, BTC goes though there and control over the Caspia Sea-Central Asia oils and gas reserves (at least 5% of world proven reserves goes there). Days before, they were negociating.

IMO, it won`t be a long conflict, either Russians will manage to beat Georgians in one day or two (after being humiliated), or they will have to settle down this issue.

http://www.voanews.com/english/2008-08-08-voa10.cfm
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article4485527.ece
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7429354.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/7549594.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7549736.stm

[reni]

There is no terrorism at all (or is senseless) without media which creates the public opinion. So terrorism, in the form that we know him already, is born in XX century. To understand what is terror we don't need to study etymology of the word itself, and this is true for many concepts, not only for terror.

@Pygmilian
Is not the first time the evil axis is created as a form of propaganda. This does not mean that it exist, but it even negate itself. You are mixing 2 different concepts. The first is out projection for good and bad, which generally is a question of dominant moral. You can be a member of a subculture who don't accept general moral, but that does not give you the right of the truth. The second is the popular prejudice, which is generally condemned, without understanding why it exist. General prejudice exist because humanity understood that a single life is too short to analyze individually everything and everyone. So we believe other opinions, which makes our life much simpler. This can seem a utilitarist point of view, and maybe it is in itself, but it explains better why prejudice exist.
One or more persons who can use the united power of humanity, which generally means statal power, do properly what they should do. This is not a manipulation. If you call this manipulation, than we simply like to be manipulated.

@Darksoul:
What you say about Jesus Christ (or better to religion) does not express everything. All you say is true, but that does not mean anything. Religion does not try verify or push you to do the same. You must believe and have faith. That's all. If you have faith then you will tell that all those facts exist because devil put them there. Ok, i know this can seem a ignorant argument, but this will make you understand that is IMPOSSIBLE to discuss about religion in this mode.
All those movies are populists because they express (and exaggerate) in a mediatic form, what was well known to scientists of the field.

@Every conspiratorial lover
Not behind everything is something!

[k_mihai]

There is no terrorism at all (or is senseless) without media which creates the public opinion. So terrorism, in the form that we know him already, is born in XX century. To understand what is terror we don't need to study etymology of the word itself, and this is true for many concepts, not only for terror.

@Pygmilian
Is not the first time the evil axis is created as a form of propaganda. This does not mean that it exist, but it even negate itself. You are mixing 2 different concepts. The first is out projection for good and bad, which generally is a question of dominant moral. You can be a member of a subculture who don't accept general moral, but that does not give you the right of the truth. The second is the popular prejudice, which is generally condemned, without understanding why it exist. General prejudice exist because humanity understood that a single life is too short to analyze individually everything and everyone. So we believe other opinions, which makes our life much simpler. This can seem a utilitarist point of view, and maybe it is in itself, but it explains better why prejudice exist.
One or more persons who can use the united power of humanity, which generally means statal power, do properly what they should do. This is not a manipulation. If you call this manipulation, than we simply like to be manipulated.

@Darksoul:
What you say about Jesus Christ (or better to religion) does not express everything. All you say is true, but that does not mean anything. Religion does not try verify or push you to do the same. You must believe and have faith. That's all. If you have faith then you will tell that all those facts exist because devil put them there. Ok, i know this can seem a ignorant argument, but this will make you understand that is IMPOSSIBLE to discuss about religion in this mode.
All those movies are populists because they express (and exaggerate) in a mediatic form, what was well known to scientists of the field.

@Every conspiratorial lover
Not behind everything is something!

in 19th century, terrorism become an available tactic. media isn`t a 20th century invention. the most important terrorist act in history, who really changed a world (by indirect effects), was in 1914, before mass radio, TV, CNN etc. in rest, mostly i agree with you.

[PYGMILIAN]

@Pygmilian
Is not the first time the evil axis is created as a form of propaganda. This does not mean that it exist, but it even negate itself. You are mixing 2 different concepts. The first is out projection for good and bad, which generally is a question of dominant moral. You can be a member of a subculture who don't accept general moral, but that does not give you the right of the truth. The second is the popular prejudice, which is generally condemned, without understanding why it exist. General prejudice exist because humanity understood that a single life is too short to analyze individually everything and everyone. So we believe other opinions, which makes our life much simpler. This can seem a utilitarianism point of view, and maybe it is in itself, but it explains better why prejudice exist.
One or more persons who can use the united power of humanity, which generally means statical power, do properly what they should do. This is not a manipulation. If you call this manipulation, than we simply like to be manipulated.

Good Evil as you so aptly put it was not what i had said but that is neither here nor there .

   and as far as prejudice goes one is only prejudice when one is ignorant to all else that is around them. Ignorance of the facts has been used by so many that it has become an excepted part of society regardless of the century you want to discuss.
  I have seen so much prejudice here in IO that it is not funny. Oh I hate Americans Oh I hate Bulgarians oh I hate this Oh i hate that. If everyone on the planet continues to hate everything and everyone they do not understand or take the time to get to know before making judgments. then Prejudice racism terrorism will continue regardless.

   and as usual it is easier to attack or rather pick apart ones opinion than to actually speak from the Heart and that is the real issue.  with out mentioning names I can be partial yet those of you who think you are so righteous in your convictions continually to berate Hoping that your sole opinion is always correct and that is why prejudice will never dissipate.

  As far as the religious aspect of this conversation goes regardless what you call your higher power it all translates to the same thing GOD.  We All Bleed RED  we all started at the same point in time. ......................more to come as time permits

[StriderHR]

For point 1)
I don't understand what is your point Darksoul?


People need something to believe to, it is not important in what they believe, could be golden bull if they wish, but it is belief and with that hope what gives us all strength to go further.

I'm Rome-Christian by belief, but not by my choice. I believe that there is something that control this universe, but it is not necessary a god or gods.
Some sort of Force maybe. I like idea of Force from Star Wars.   
Saying that I will not believe and will newer believe in destiny, because idea that my life is premade in stars, tarot cards, .... is simply not bearable.

In the end my point is   live and let live (you can believe in green Fairy if you wish as long as you don't try to impose those belief to me  )

[bran360]

i know you dont like spammers..but this is some deep stuff

[Polymeron]

Well I have a few choice things to say about all of the above, but I'll only address the point that no one here has discussed in depth yet, about central banking, its flaws, and the power its owners wield. I have two points I'd like to raise.

First off, if you honestly think that money and governance can be artificially separated, you simply do not understand what money is. We've all gotten used to think of money as being grounded in some agreed-upon resource or value, but values shift, and these resources (if they exist at all - US central banking no longer backs up with gold reserves) are only valuable by the same shifting standards. I assure you, if a nuclear apocalypse happens tomorrow, a $ backed by a gold reserve will be as useless as a $ not backed by one, because you can't eat paper nor gold. Values shift, my friends.
What doesn't shift are two basic things: Production (and labor), and the basic principle of ownership. And since ownership is largely over resources created or extracted using labor, these are one and the same. So money, in essence, represents the distribution of both existing wealth (what we've created) and directing our future endeavors (what we will create).

If you've been following me this far, please consider this last point. Money, or the value it represents, is given to people in order to accomplish projects. That's not the money you and I know. When you and I think about money, we think small, because small is all we know - for us money is what we buy in the supermarket, a new purchase we might make, a change in our lifestyle. But think big for a moment - the billionaire's wealth is virtually unaffected by his individual spending. Food, travel, luxury, all that has no effect. What do they do with the money? Invest in projects. But what does that investment mean? When the billionaire decides whether to invest in a plant in Minnesota or one in North Carolina, they change economies by that decision - they create jobs, they get buildings erected, they basically direct what people will be doing. This is a great responsibility, and it's directing a policy - it's something a lot of people would assume would be in the hands of an elected official - but, it's not.

Because, money is society's way of recognizing your right to tell other people what to do.
Governance is the right of society to tell you what to do, also.
Money is governance.

I repeat, money is governance, just a freer and more quantifiable form of one, but it still is that. Until you've realized this, you can keep on wondering why government and capital are always so intertwined.

The top reason why free market economies flourish, is because they give this power - this great responsibility - to those who can get it. Now I'm not saying you can't win the lottery, but odds are you have money because you did something that other people wanted you to do. And you get a lot of money by doing something that a lot of people want you to do very much. So on the whole, the billionaire has a much better chance of being adequate for making these decisions than you and I, or even an elected committee. If he doesn't - if he makes a wrong decision - the money and the power associated with it would drain away and dissipate back into the general populace, bit by bit.

Where are the banks in all this? The banks shift the wealth (and the power associated with it) - temporarily - to people desiring its immediate use. That's the loan you get. They used to take that wealth directly from those willing to wait before they used that power (deposits and savings). These days, while basing off of these, they loan based on a loose estimation of the public's capacity for labor, inferred from all sorts of tell-tale signs that I will not bore you with. And yes, that system causes crashes - it is more efficient on the whole (less idle money at any given time), but more vulnerable to fluctuations.

And yes, the banks will charge you interest for the loan, and they bloody well should. Anyone who advocates interest-free loans is advocating gross injustice. (I'm not saying that more interest=more justice, mind). Why should you get to buy a car now, and not me? Why should you get to build a hydroelectric dam in your country, and not that my country progress its space program? An interest free loan is something you get from a friend because, yes, a loan is a sacrifice, and the time in which you have the money is valuable. And if you've had a negative balance for ten years in your account, it means that you got from society a lot of resources 10 years before you were actually entitled to them, and yes, I expect you to damn well pay for it.

It may seem like I'm defending central banking here. That's only partly true - I think central banking has lots of flaws the way it is done today. But, it is important to have, in a free society, some way to petition for more resources. If I want to launch a new product, Capitalism is offering me a way to get that opportunity, which Communism does not - in the form of a loan. Yes, society will own my ass if I fail (through my debt to the bank, which means I'll have to work hard and consume little). It may or may not be just, but it's an option. Be thankful for that option, do not take it lightly, and use it with wisdom.

My second point is a much shorter one. Simplistic movies, while giving you a broader understanding of how credit works, ultimately make that understanding rather shallow. They'll give you the impression that the banks always gain wealth and power - after all, they generate interest which always goes to them, while the rest of the money stays the same, right? Wrong. That's not the case at all. I've been working in the credit card industry for the past 5 years (quit today, BTW, I'm moving to high-tech), and I know something these movies will never show you - how the banks lose money. Banks make errors too. If a bank lends 300 million to some guy wanting to build apartments in Russia, and that guy disappears with the money, that money is gone. If they lend it to someone who goes bankrupt, again, that money is gone. It is not repaid, ever. But that person did buy things with that money, so essentially that's money leaking from the banks, back into the general populace. They make up for such losses by gains from interests on loans and more successful investments. So yes, that does mean we're paying for bank mistakes, but that is true of most businesses - when a business makes mistakes, it covers the losses with its profit, so everybody loses. The business owner loses more, and loses more immediately, but everyone loses when a business makes a mistake. And the more money is involved, the more society loses from such mistakes. Because, get this into your heads already, money is governance. It's a responsibility. Any body given the job to manage and distribute it will always be powerful... And power corrupts. It's not because they are banks - it's because they are human.

What can be done to make this better?
I'll let you know when I have the answers...

Peace.

[k_mihai]

about central banks, is kind of impossible to have a modern economy (even communist) without them. they give an important impulse to wealth creation, by directing currency flows (in part).

but even so, money per se exist in a pre-definite political order. they are power, but only in societies who value wealth creation over other values. most modern ones are like that, but, for example, wealth in an feudal society was not as important as in contemporary ones. there is always the need of an authority to uphold property laws, guarantee contacts. since perfect market is an illusion (perfect competion doesn`t exist in RL, most markets are oligolopolistic), and the self-regulation works only up to a certain level, there is also the need of someone to bail out the economy in crisis (like US Fed did by the nationalization of Bearn Stern in the sub-morgage crisis). same at international level, when there is no agreement between major powers on economic fundamentals, there is no significant global economy. for example, world markets almost disintegrated between 1919 until 1945. that`s to point out the relativity of currency and also the close link to political power. there is always force in background. in 19th century, most advanced economies sent fleets to take over indebted countries who fell in crisis, now, they send IMF.

about the link to production, that is severed in consuming societies. most of world financial growth come from financial derivates, currency speculation, and hedge fond, who borrowed money from banks and bet on market. there is no direct link between that growth and the level of economies, best example being US, where the level of economies stagnates, but Wall Street was growing. and more firms valued more marked value than real indicators. Enron case, where management faked statistics to get better shares valued and then gave themselves huge bonuses on fake future estimates was not quite an isolated case (that`s significant about management responsibility). also, since the world financial system is not regulated since 1971, when Nixon destroyed Bretton Woods order, it works with a succession of bubbles and crises (mortgage crisis in 2007-8, Argentinian crisis in 2002,  dot com crisis in 2000-2001 , East Asian, Russian and Brazilian one in 1997-1998, Mexico crash in 1994, European Monetary System fall in 1992, Wall Street crash in 1987, again Mexican, Brazilian and Argentinian crisis started in 1982 etc). those were all contained, but the whole thing is very fragile, and if unforseen events happened, and global management falls, a big catastrophe can follow. many of the disasters of the 1930`s, rise of Hitler, World Word 2, were impossible, had not the 1929 crash occurred. is true that in most of those cases, US Fed (more or less with the help of IMF, but IMF is 2 poor to handle a major crisis on its own) acted as a baker of last resort and bailed out countries in crisis to avoid a major disaster, but US herself lives of credit from East Asian and European countries (is somehow shameful that the biggest economy of the world is also the biggest debtor, no big responsibility here either) and may one day be unable to contain or foresaw a big crisis. 

Edit

ops, i forgot about Enron, Arthur Andersen etc and Long Term Management Fund crashes, who were due directly to manipulation of markets.     

[Polymeron]

This is all very true... And I think there's not enough regulation regarding how far you can go on speculation. Most people lack the economic understanding (and time) to supervise the very companies they have invested in, and that includes most brokers. The more we rely on indicators for future growth, the more vulnerable we become to these bubbles and crises; and yet, the less we'd rely on future growth, the more we'd stagnate, because ingeniuity and innovation always have only that to go on, which is precisely why free market economies grow so fast despite the inherent inefficiencies involved in economic crashes.

Normally I'd say the best disinfectant is sunlight, when it comes to something controlled by the public (such as share prices), but unfortunately share prices can become very disconnected from the actual prospects of a company and, like I said above, most people won't recognize a scam if it hit them in the face with a foreclosure warrant. And if you don't believe that, then I have some acres to sell you in the Bay of Honduras, and some Poyais Dollars.

I'd also normally think that education might help, but so long as the market is open, greed will trump real understanding, every time. Sham operations can go on for years and years looking to the entire world like the most profitable businesses known to mankind. This screws with risk management equations, as evidenced in the latest mortgage credit crash, which cost the public billions and billions in failed projects.

Maybe we need to dictate certain guidelines for investment - not allow contracts that bind you without the ability to evaluate risk, or set a fallback value for lost investments backed by government, or what have you. But, every solution I try to come up with strikes me as completely inadequate.
People who have no idea what they're doing in the market tend to get stripped of their wealth at some point. Is that as it should be? Something tells me it's too easy to be convinced to invest in something you don't understand, and lose that money; and it's in the interests of pretty much everyone else that you do - your loss is their gain. Most people just rely on others in which they trust, figuratively gambling their money on the trust they have in that person (like a broker) - this ties in with what Reni said about the evolvement of general prejudice. This promotes not only bigger errors but also corruption, because you can betray that trust for your own ends, something which is sometimes hard to prove. It's all a vicious cycle with many victims.

But, and this is the big question, is there any way to separate monetary policy from the interests of people who stand to gain or lose from that policy? Or to make such interests irrelevant to the decided policy?

I suspect any such way would require rethinking the whole concept of the free market, and monetary theory.


EDIT: I hope we weren't being TOO serious, enough to kill this topic? So careful what you wish for, guys

[KoSaC]

WARNING : Oki its a serious topic so please serious answers without spams ( for K_Mihai , Kopsi , KoSaC - if you dont know what to say please dont enter here ) ...i saw in a few posts K_mihai is a smart boy so i think he has some good things to say here.....Kopsi is stupid like s**t so he only can say some stupid  ,senslles , sexual phrases and nothing more....

" When the power of Love overcomes the love of Power , the world will know peace "......

let's see who can say something smart about these words :
- Central Banck's
-Terrorism
-The greatest story ever told ( about gods , our believes and all this bulshit )


for more interest try to find and wiew the documentary movie : Swhadows of Past"  the proofs there are just incredible.....it openes the eyes .......

↑this is only post i actually read..omg,