Simonemendez
Skilled Investigator
<TABLE border=0 cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0><TBODY><TR><TD vAlign=top>But anyone is welcome to
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
-
NEW! LOWEST RATES EVER -- SUPPORT THE SHOW AND ENJOY THE VERY BEST PREMIUM PARACAST EXPERIENCE! Welcome to The Paracast+, eight years young! For a low subscription fee, you can download the ad-free version of The Paracast and the exclusive, member-only, After The Paracast bonus podcast, featuring color commentary, exclusive interviews, the continuation of interviews that began on the main episode of The Paracast. We also offer lifetime memberships! Flash! Take advantage of our lowest rates ever! Act now! It's easier than ever to susbcribe! You can sign up right here!
Question For Americans.
- Thread starter Simonemendez
- Start date
Xylo
Paranormal Adept
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dennis-a-henigan/on-guns-calderon-spoke-fo_b_585312.html
<LINK request Calderon?s discussing blog a to>
First off I'd like to say that yes, many of those guns siezed in Mexico probably had their origin in the USA. But I highly doubt that more than a handful were sold in any traditional manner. I would also believe that a great deal of those weapons originated in the EU, or in the former USSR.
Guns are a big business, and cheap guns are a bigger business. There's no way to convince me that "Joe's Guns" can compete with the mass importers and smugglers of this world. So whatever his request is, it will probably be gratuitously denied.
Further, just because we allowed him to speak doesn't mean we will acquiesce to those requests. It's quite typical for diplomatic envoys and heads of state to be allowed to speak, and to address lawmakers. In fact, it's done daily. Russia, China, and probably almost all of the world's leaders will allow diplomats an audience. Then they will politely applaud afterwards and forget about it.
And that's the beauty of our representative republic...
With regard to Rand Paul, I think you're falling into the frightened media hype with that one. I don't think you'll see any re-hash of the 1950's and 1960's ever again, at least not in regards to race.
<LINK request Calderon?s discussing blog a to>
First off I'd like to say that yes, many of those guns siezed in Mexico probably had their origin in the USA. But I highly doubt that more than a handful were sold in any traditional manner. I would also believe that a great deal of those weapons originated in the EU, or in the former USSR.
Guns are a big business, and cheap guns are a bigger business. There's no way to convince me that "Joe's Guns" can compete with the mass importers and smugglers of this world. So whatever his request is, it will probably be gratuitously denied.
Further, just because we allowed him to speak doesn't mean we will acquiesce to those requests. It's quite typical for diplomatic envoys and heads of state to be allowed to speak, and to address lawmakers. In fact, it's done daily. Russia, China, and probably almost all of the world's leaders will allow diplomats an audience. Then they will politely applaud afterwards and forget about it.
And that's the beauty of our representative republic...
With regard to Rand Paul, I think you're falling into the frightened media hype with that one. I don't think you'll see any re-hash of the 1950's and 1960's ever again, at least not in regards to race.
P
Paul Kimball
Guest
It cracks me up to see Americans whingeing about being told what to do. Seriously, do you not see the ultimate irony here?
For my part, I tend to agree with keeping a country's southern borders well guarded, so as to prevent undesirables from coming across. No country knows that better than Canada.
For my part, I tend to agree with keeping a country's southern borders well guarded, so as to prevent undesirables from coming across. No country knows that better than Canada.
Xylo
Paranormal Adept
It cracks me up to see Americans whingeing about being told what to do. Seriously, do you not see the ultimate irony here?
For my part, I tend to agree with keeping a country's southern borders well guarded, so as to prevent undesirables from coming across. No country knows that better than Canada.
Sadly, the paradigm has shifted and no one told us: we had to figure it out for ourselves.
tyder001
Paranormal Adept
P
pixelsmith
Guest
We the People are going to need those high powered rifles when We dust off the 2nd Amendment. The 2nd Amendment is NOT in reference to hunting or simply owning guns.
CapnG
Devil's Advocate
Then you should ask American companies to stop shipping them there in service of the great god capitalism and the almighty dollar.
Yes, I know I swore to refrain from political statements on this board but everytime I see this kind of comment I want to slap somebody. China isn't STEALING your jobs. Your fellow Americans are GIVING them to China in the service of profit because they don't give a shit about you.
I'm all for righteous indignation but before you start firing off, you should make sure you're aimed at the right target.
Ron Collins
Curiously Confused
Like it or not the U.S. sets the bar. Militarily, Monetarily, Culturally and to a certain extent Politically. I'll bet 95% of the world can tell you who the President of the U.S is. You ask who the President of Mexico, Canada, or the Premier of China is and I would bet the number drops to under 10%. The point is, when your currency sets all other markets, your military is vastly superior, your culture infiltrates and permeates the globe your country, by default, has a voice that carries more weight. Sure we can play the hate America game but stop and consider what state the world would be in if there wasn't a mostly benevolent big boy on the block.
The second amendment gives me the right to keep and bare arms. Is a .45 revolver any less deadly than AR15? It is people that cause harm with guns not the type or configuration. To ban any gun is to ignore the causality of the violence. Look at what happened in Australia when they banned guns. Did violent crime go down? NO, it did not. But, stabbing and bludgeoning crimes went up. Use the forum search an you can see that I posted something about this a couple of years ago using a report prepared and found on an official Australian government site. Our money, time, and effort would be better spent finding the issues causing violent outbursts and treating them instead of trying to outlaw or ban arms.
As for our border security, Canada's security, and Mexico's security I see a very real need to establish and maintain a tighter border. For me it is about one of the largest causalities of violence in America, Canada, and Mexico... illicit drugs. Cut the easy supply chain and spend time and money finding, arresting and vigorously prosecuting drug users, dealers, and traffickers. I doubt you can ever stop all trafficking but you can sure as hell make a gigantic dent in the availability. Now, it is no shocker that the supply line comes primarily from Canada.... jut kidding, but it does come either from or through Mexico. With the long and well documented proliferation of corruption in the Political system in Mexico I would lay good odds that the illustrious Senior Calderon had some well funded ulterior motives. So, we give him the finger and try to lock down. in the process, I am sure Paul wouldn't mind if Minnesotans and Sarah Palin would stop crossing the border and using the HealthCare system his tax dollars pay for. I am very OK with that. Perhaps it will help increase the public outcry for our own National Health Care Service.
---------- Post added at 10:54 PM ---------- Previous post was at 10:48 PM ----------
You are absolutely correct in this. We are giving them away. It actually sickens me how easily it is for large U.S. corporations to outsource jobs for as little as 8% gains. BUT, stock losses of a few percentage points does have a big global effect. So, we cant just ignore profit margins. It takes smarter folks than me to figure out how it should all work but from a reductionists POV I agree with your base point.
The second amendment gives me the right to keep and bare arms. Is a .45 revolver any less deadly than AR15? It is people that cause harm with guns not the type or configuration. To ban any gun is to ignore the causality of the violence. Look at what happened in Australia when they banned guns. Did violent crime go down? NO, it did not. But, stabbing and bludgeoning crimes went up. Use the forum search an you can see that I posted something about this a couple of years ago using a report prepared and found on an official Australian government site. Our money, time, and effort would be better spent finding the issues causing violent outbursts and treating them instead of trying to outlaw or ban arms.
As for our border security, Canada's security, and Mexico's security I see a very real need to establish and maintain a tighter border. For me it is about one of the largest causalities of violence in America, Canada, and Mexico... illicit drugs. Cut the easy supply chain and spend time and money finding, arresting and vigorously prosecuting drug users, dealers, and traffickers. I doubt you can ever stop all trafficking but you can sure as hell make a gigantic dent in the availability. Now, it is no shocker that the supply line comes primarily from Canada.... jut kidding, but it does come either from or through Mexico. With the long and well documented proliferation of corruption in the Political system in Mexico I would lay good odds that the illustrious Senior Calderon had some well funded ulterior motives. So, we give him the finger and try to lock down. in the process, I am sure Paul wouldn't mind if Minnesotans and Sarah Palin would stop crossing the border and using the HealthCare system his tax dollars pay for. I am very OK with that. Perhaps it will help increase the public outcry for our own National Health Care Service.
---------- Post added at 10:54 PM ---------- Previous post was at 10:48 PM ----------
You are absolutely correct in this. We are giving them away. It actually sickens me how easily it is for large U.S. corporations to outsource jobs for as little as 8% gains. BUT, stock losses of a few percentage points does have a big global effect. So, we cant just ignore profit margins. It takes smarter folks than me to figure out how it should all work but from a reductionists POV I agree with your base point.
CapnG
Devil's Advocate
Actually that would be 0% considering we have a Prime Minister, not a President.
Ultimately I can only see two outcomes: either the standard of living in the west must drop to match China or expectaions of corporate profit must be culled to more realistic levels. Either way someone's losing money but that's to be expected. The idea that one is entitled to limitless growth and exponential profit simply because it's possible and seemingly without consequence is the viewpoint of a spoiled child not a rational adult.
Ron Collins
Curiously Confused
Actually that would be 0% considering we have a Prime Minister, not a President.
hahaha, I can't believe I didn't put that in there. I was typing too fast and didnt proof read.
Actually the chinese are, in my opinion, ripe for a cultural revolution. The class division is too great and they are getting tastes of Western privilege and liking it. Give them 10 to 20 years and I think they will be caught up with our own standards. plus, I have no intention of giving up my home or other conveniences. I fully recognize that this makes me a participant in the problem and not in the solution. But, I have worked too hard for what I have. There are just some things I am not willing to do. I think most of Western Society feels the same way.
CapnG
Devil's Advocate
Whether or not China stabalizes into a modern, western-type society or pops like a balloon is something we'll all have to be weary of.
Part of me agrees. The other part thinks we're too damned high and mighty and full of ourselves, completely spoiled and ungrateful, a society of Paris Hiltons, unable to recognize that luxury is not the norm. The comforts and conveniences we now take for granted are miracles unimagined in our grandparent's time.
Tom From Hong Kong
Sleeping with one eye open . . .
Many suspect that the Chinese economy will come unravelled, sooner rather than later, potentially leading to social dislocation. Watch the first 40 minutes of this presentation and it will be obvious that China presents the classic economic bubble:
Yes, it is helpful that China buys U.S. sovereign debt, but what would happen to China if the U.S. disallowed imports of Chinese manufactured goods (particularly with the Eurozone in economic trouble)? Adjustments would be required for the U.S. (e.g., movement of manufacturing plants to Mexico and South America), while China would face a severe economic crisis.
Yes, it is helpful that China buys U.S. sovereign debt, but what would happen to China if the U.S. disallowed imports of Chinese manufactured goods (particularly with the Eurozone in economic trouble)? Adjustments would be required for the U.S. (e.g., movement of manufacturing plants to Mexico and South America), while China would face a severe economic crisis.
Or maybe build some plants in the U.S. for the downtrodden Americans. 
Imagine an American-made iPad.
Imagine an American-made iPad.
Simonemendez
Skilled Investigator
SoCalGNX
SoCalGNX
Actually that would be 0% considering we have a Prime Minister, not a President.
Ultimately I can only see two outcomes: either the standard of living in the west must drop to match China or expectaions of corporate profit must be culled to more realistic levels. Either way someone's losing money but that's to be expected. The idea that one is entitled to limitless growth and exponential profit simply because it's possible and seemingly without consequence is the viewpoint of a spoiled child not a rational adult.
I agree. We cannot live in a communist society but we have to put the brakes on corporations. Lately they seem to have the rights of an individual but none of the responsibilities.
SgtRock
Skilled Investigator
It cracks me up to see Americans whingeing about being told what to do. Seriously, do you not see the ultimate irony here?
For my part, I tend to agree with keeping a country's southern borders well guarded, so as to prevent undesirables from coming across. No country knows that better than Canada.
Who the Hell would want to go to friggin Canada! Why don't you just stay up there Paul!
CapnG
Devil's Advocate
Anyone seeking to lead a relatively peaceful life, virtually free from gun-violence and immune from health-related bankruptcy. Come one, come all.
Angel of Ioren
Friendly Skeptic
That sounds about right. I love my wonderful country.