There is an expression, “Natura artis magistra” (I’m from Amsterdam). I should like to see adoption of “Natura civilis magistra”
Has not nature taught that survival requires the control of resources?
...open ended! I would say that the issue is perhaps renewable vs. finite. Some would say that America has a thirst for oil. Well this can not be the case. I think America has a legislated demand for it! For example, the auto industry lobbied congress for inefficiency;“Americans want big cars…”, etc. The banking industry lobbied, they all did. This is correct, no. One reason why we can’t collectively pursue renewable e is we’re not allowed. LOL ...you can’t deregulate infinite resource material, only that which is finite. Infinite resource material supports inherently the sovereignty of Labor, it is endless. But not that which is finite. This is what is destroying planet Earth. Yeah, now lets make fun, right?
Let’s not call them oil companies. Lets call them energy companies. Several energy companies have invested in renewable resources. The goal is to make renewable energy profitable. Profit drives the business market.
As soon as the big “energy” companies can find a renewable resource that they can control and profit from. You will see legislation change quickly. Any independent developer that comes up with a successful design will be bought out or tied up with legislation. They, the big energy companies, control the resources. They control the government.
Those that control the resources dictate the future for the rest of us. People have ideologies and dreams of how the world ought to be run. Once you control the resources only then can you run the world as you see fit.
IMO all of the politics, wars, etc are just side-show drama.
There is an expression, “Natura artis magistra” (I’m from Amsterdam). I should like to see adoption of “Natura civilis magistra”
Has not nature taught that survival requires the control of resources?
...open ended! I would say that the issue is perhaps renewable vs. finite. Some would say that America has a thirst for oil. Well this can not be the case. I think America has a legislated demand for it! For example, the auto industry lobbied congress for inefficiency;“Americans want big cars…”, etc. The banking industry lobbied, they all did. This is correct, no. One reason why we can’t collectively pursue renewable e is we’re not allowed. LOL ...you can’t deregulate infinite resource material, only that which is finite. Infinite resource material supports inherently the sovereignty of Labor, it is endless. But not that which is finite. This is what is destroying planet Earth. Yeah, now lets make fun, right?
Let’s not call them oil companies. Lets call them energy companies. Several energy companies have invested in renewable resources. The goal is to make renewable energy profitable. Profit drives the business market.
As soon as the big “energy” companies can find a renewable resource that they can control and profit from. You will see legislation change quickly. Any independent developer that comes up with a successful design will be bought out or tied up with legislation. They, the big energy companies, control the resources. They control the government.
Those that control the resources dictate the future for the rest of us. People have ideologies and dreams of how the world ought to be run. Once you control the resources only then can you run the world as you see fit.
IMO all of the politics, wars, etc are just side-show drama.
You are saying that Democracy does no longer exist and we now have a Plutocracy. Is there not something Unconstitunional about that? Why do I not hear a challenge from someone with a Voice. Is everyone corrupt now?
There is an expression, “Natura artis magistra” (I’m from Amsterdam). I should like to see adoption of “Natura civilis magistra”
Has not nature taught that survival requires the control of resources?
...open ended! I would say that the issue is perhaps renewable vs. finite. Some would say that America has a thirst for oil. Well this can not be the case. I think America has a legislated demand for it! For example, the auto industry lobbied congress for inefficiency;“Americans want big cars…”, etc. The banking industry lobbied, they all did. This is correct, no. One reason why we can’t collectively pursue renewable e is we’re not allowed. LOL ...you can’t deregulate infinite resource material, only that which is finite. Infinite resource material supports inherently the sovereignty of Labor, it is endless. But not that which is finite. This is what is destroying planet Earth. Yeah, now lets make fun, right?
Let’s not call them oil companies. Lets call them energy companies. Several energy companies have invested in renewable resources. The goal is to make renewable energy profitable. Profit drives the business market.
As soon as the big “energy” companies can find a renewable resource that they can control and profit from. You will see legislation change quickly. Any independent developer that comes up with a successful design will be bought out or tied up with legislation. They, the big energy companies, control the resources. They control the government.
Those that control the resources dictate the future for the rest of us. People have ideologies and dreams of how the world ought to be run. Once you control the resources only then can you run the world as you see fit.
IMO all of the politics, wars, etc are just side-show drama.
You are saying that Democracy does no longer exist and we now have a Plutocracy. Is there not something Unconstitunional about that? Why do I not hear a challenge from someone with a Voice. Is everyone corrupt now?
...a challenge, what? What challenge, the original question was is plunder groundless? Last night I posed that question to a 6th grade school teacher. He paused and I said, “sleep on it…”, he replied, “I don’t have to. Yes, it is groundless—that is everything!’ What he didn’t say was, ‘What do you mean by plunder’, ‘what do you mean by groundless’, ‘be more specific’, ‘that is a stupid question!’, ‘...socially, economically?’, ‘plunder, ha ha?’, you get my drift. The actual point is not agree but to simply see—grasp what is being said first.
I understand that many are well versed but the question still remains, is plunder groundless?
OK….yes, plunder is groundless. End of discussion.
Now what did that answer solve, other than satisfy your ego?
LOL I can’t have an ego.
End of discussion, really?
The Center For Inquiry…end of discussion, yikes! You simply don’t get it, I don’t think.
You have this sort of ethnocentric take; you can’t grasp the question so…ad hominem is in order. This is too bad. I am rather disappointed here…in this forum but you can’t say, “...no one ever asked.” And you are a Sr. here too, hmm.
And if you speak the truth that plunder is groundless then why, why is plunder groundless? You knew it was coming, right? LOL
Why is plunder groundless for you?
OK….yes, plunder is groundless. End of discussion.
Now what did that answer solve, other than satisfy your ego?
LOL I can’t have an ego.
End of discussion, really?
The Center For Inquiry…end of discussion, yikes! You simply don’t get it, I don’t think.
You have this sort of ethnocentric take; you can’t grasp the question so…ad hominem is in order. This is too bad. I am rather disappointed here…in this forum but you can’t say, “...no one ever asked.” And you are a Sr. here too, hmm.
And if you speak the truth that plunder is groundless then why, why is plunder groundless? You knew it was coming, right? LOL
Why is plunder groundless for you?
I have explained my position in previous answers, but you dismissed them as not answering your question. On the other hand, you have not explained your position. This is not a discussion at all. Implicitly the ad hominem attitude lies with you.
I think that many feel it is an offensive question but plunder is only one thing, it is not arbitrary in the least. Think it through, please—let go of any notion of ‘ethnocentrism’ because it doesn’t work, it wont help—it will only make matters worse, no?
I think that many feel it is an offensive question but plunder is only one thing, it is not arbitrary in the least. Think it through, please—let go of any notion of ‘ethnocentrism’ because it doesn’t work, it wont help—it will only make matters worse, no?
Is plunder groundless? The question is not offensive, your attitude is (IMO). To introduce ethnocentrism is ad hominem in the highest degree. I am done with you.
I think that many feel it is an offensive question but plunder is only one thing, it is not arbitrary in the least. Think it through, please—let go of any notion of ‘ethnocentrism’ because it doesn’t work, it wont help—it will only make matters worse, no?
Is plunder groundless? The question is not offensive, your attitude is (IMO). To introduce ethnocentrism is ad hominem in the highest degree. I am done with you.
#1) I believe you, you are done w/ me.
#2) It doesn’t make any sense not to answer. And btw, it is not out of the question to speak of
enthno ‘you know what’.
I don’t have a bad or offensive attitude, this is not the case. It is a difficult question but there is an answer, a concrete one—that’s all. I mean it is already true that plunder is groundless, I wanted to know does anyone else see what I see and if all this then can be seen then lets talk about it. LOL
But you are done w/ me.
You are saying that Democracy does no longer exist and we now have a Plutocracy. Is there not something Unconstitunional about that? Why do I not hear a challenge from someone with a Voice. Is everyone corrupt now?
I think the political fight has gone out of many. Part of it perhaps is who can you trust?
There is an assumption of morality and ethics. Held over from the days of religions maybe.
Also the question really is, is anyone above corruption and what is corruption? Some ideology of ethics or morality which becomes difficult to apply without an in-corruptible Arbiter.
I wonder anyone, if given enough wealth, power for a long enough time, how ethical and moral they can remain?
People I think generally do what they can get away with. It’s only the threat of some consequence, real or imagined that keeps them in check.
Is plunder groundless? (just to stay with the theme of the thread)
Only if the cost/consequence is greater then you are willing to pay.
Though maybe I’m a bit of an anarchist… I don’t advocate this. It just seems the reality of things to me.
You are saying that Democracy does no longer exist and we now have a Plutocracy. Is there not something Unconstitunional about that? Why do I not hear a challenge from someone with a Voice. Is everyone corrupt now?
I think the political fight has gone out of many. Part of it perhaps is who can you trust?
There is an assumption of morality and ethics. Held over from the days of religions maybe.
Also the question really is, is anyone above corruption and what is corruption? Some ideology of ethics or morality which becomes difficult to apply without an in-corruptible Arbiter.
I wonder anyone, if given enough wealth, power for a long enough time, how ethical and moral they can remain?
People I think generally do what they can get away with. It’s only the threat of some consequence, real or imagined that keeps them in check.
Is plunder groundless? (just to stay with the theme of the thread)
Only if the cost/consequence is greater then you are willing to pay.
Though maybe I’m a bit of an anarchist… I don’t advocate this. It just seems the reality of things to me.
I agree,
However envision this scene. A natural calamity, people are trapped on and island or snowed in on a mountain and in each case there is but one grocery store, the owner absent. After one week being trapped, running out of food, water, matches, batteries, lampoil, babyfood, would it be groundless to “plunder” the grocery store?
Or the man wading chest in water during Katrina with a loaf of bread and a water jug held high over is head? Did he plunder and was it groundless. The newspapers reported “widespread plunder” was that accurate reporting?
The question has no single moral answer. Any one insisting that plunder is groundless has probably never been in a position where the very survival of your family has become paramount and supercedes all laws and concepts of moral behavior. Can anyone accused them of committing a groundless act?
