Now we're getting somewhere.

How would I go about it?

Well, what do these people need to be able to do that in the first place?

Well, they need reousrces, they need workers to build it, they need workers to staff it, and they need people to buy whatever service it is they're offering, right?

It would make sense to me that if the rest of the country thought as I did, that a company such as Monsanto would never get off the ground, because it's a bad idea.. Messing with food, messing with the environment, etc etc... and look where it got us?

There are news reports all the time about what type of foods you can eat, and how much is healthy -- not because the food by itself is bad for you, but because what the food contains as a result of these companies is poisonous to us.

There are few spots in my area that I can go through without getting hit with a cloud of chemicals that I can't even begin to pinpoint what they might be. Some of it smells like death incarnate, some smells like molding laundry, some smells like it'd set your face on fire if there was enough of it in a confined space.. right next to people's houses.


I didn't build that shit, and neither did the people that live there. So who did, and how the hell did they do it without fighting off an army of pissed off residents?

I betcha dollars to donuts that .gov had something to do with it, and the media did too. (perhaps, if only due to lack of coverage)

(or that oh so sweet promise of "JOOOOBBBBSSSS YA'LL!! WOOOOOO!")

These factors combined with a genuine apathetic tendency amongst most people, that kinda stuff can happen.

THAT needs to change, not the kind of change Obama supports, which is giving .gov more power to not only do that, but ensure that anyone who opposes it can be dealt with swiftly and without question.


A free market, perhaps, could handle that situation a little more fairly. A free market, free of .gov intervention, free of .gov regulation, and free of .gov intimidation.

Or maybe a decentralized form of government, wherein each state is essentially it's own country, and within each there could be any type of order the people that actually lived there -- wanted. I mean, that was kinda the idea going into it, but clearly a constitution that stated plainly what .gov couldn't do didn't stop them from doing it anyway, thereby slowly transforming each state into something more in-line with it's own principles, which I happen to disagree with on a very natural level.

I know I said I would stop posting in this thread, but how about instead I stop commenting, and just post links:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fQ_P1Sq0s9k&NR=1
http://www.theflucase.com/index.php?...mid=64&lang=en

http://www.sharkliveroiluk.com/#Squa...%20Liver%20Oil

Please see the financial sector for a fine example of what the free market will do when left to its own devices.

Yeah. All highly reputable, thoroughly vetted sources with absolutely no hidden agenda whatsoever. And an advert for shark liver oil. You an investor?

How do you mean, sir? Are you talking about now, or sometime in the past?

Right now I see it failing, and I also see that .gov has a lot to do with it being so screwed up in the first place.

In any case, one of the stipulations for a functioning society is a smart one. I can't really feel confident saying America is smart as a whole, because of the disproportionately large amount of greedy suckers lookin to get conned.

Can't just blame their feeble minded antics on schools, or parents, or TV, or drugs, or any thing else individually. You can, however, blame it on a combination of many or all of these influences, and a lot of these influences are the way they are because of .gov.

Therefore, problems today are caused by idiots, who were created by the government.

Yeah I'm talking about now. Pretty much everything that collapsed on Wall Street and required filthy rich bankers to stick their hand in my wallet was the result of lack of regulation. It was a free market, without any interference, and it would have brought down the entire world economy if ".gov" hadn't bailed their worthless asses out. So spare me the worshiping at the alter of the free market.

Actually, I can and I do. Every one of these factors has a much, much, much greater impact on the general level of stupidity in this country than anything ".gov" has done. We don't need ".gov" to create idiots, we're doing that just fine on our own. It is one of the few things this country can still do well.

Ok..

Not quite, and the bailout didn't help much, did it?

Schools? Think No Child Left Behind. Government had nothing to do with that, huh?

Parents? Well.. We all know how "difficult" it is to be a parent these days, what with all the non-education you as a parent received from the schools you came from, combined with the relentless advertisements on the TV, which is about the only thing the average parent can comprehend anymore, combined with all of the rules and regulations that a parent MUST follow, regardless of how he/she feels about it.

etc etc.

Drugs? Hmm.. Part of me knows that you're not going to see it my way, and part of me doesn't really care how you see it. Drugs are an issue of regulation. (of course, no regulation has to do with the government, right?) We've all known for a long time that forbidden fruit is sweeter, and much like that, when you tell someone not to do something, the typical response is to do it. More significantly, if drugs weren't illegal, drugs wouldn't be nearly as entertaining, nor would so many Americans be funding the individuals whom they hear on the TV are so terrible.

It's a lot like firearms. I've shot, and handled firearms since I was strong enough to hold one. I've never shot my own wall, my self, my parents, my friends, or anyone else for that matter. The only thing that's come from my early exposure to firearms is a love of math, machining, and chemistry, and the ability to obtain food from "unconventional" resources, by todays standards. (Also a bit of a chip on my shoulder over all the... regulations.. regarding firearms (which, IIRC, the constitution says something about.. "The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.")
(regulation <> infringement?)

Things I haven't done with firearms -

Point one at a camera because it's so gangsta.
Sell one.
Bling one out.
Use one for political gain.
Use one for financial gain.
etc

Let me ask you some things - When was financing invented? By whom? For what reason? When did it become popular in America to buy things you couldn't afford?

Schools were a mess long before HRH George II unleashed this monstrosity on them.

What "rules and regulations"? Name one. And if your kids are victims of relentless TV advertising, the only person to blame is yourself. Every TV I've ever owned has a off switch and in my opinion, those should be used frequently. Incompetent parenting has nothing to do with government and everything to do with the parents themselves.

Bully for you. And for every responsible firearm owner, there is a total moron with a gun. I once sat in a restaurant during deer season and nearly lost my lunch when some asshat at a nearby table talked about shooting at what he thought was the sound of a deer. That clown had absolutely no friggin idea what he was shooting at because he didn't see anything. Neither he, nor anyone at his table apparently thought that shooting at something you couldn't see was a bad idea. As far as I'm concerned, the only government problem there was that the government allowed a complete moron like that to be armed. If a firearm safety course were mandatory for buying a gun, I wouldn't have any problem with guns at all.

What does this have to do with government? Or swine flu since that is what this thread was theoretically about? Heck, financing was probably invented long before government was. Money, in some form or another, has been around a loooong time. And for people living beyond their means, that also has nothing to do with the government. That is personal stupidity.

Thank you for addressing my unbelievably weak argument. I was hoping you'd make mention in atleast one instance of .gov's responsibility to do anything.

(and kudos to you for thinking before 2000+, in regards to schools being a mess before .gov "stuck it's hand in your pocket" and gave schools more money to not only maintain a set of "standards" but also ensured that those "standards" were so low that anyone could meet em, no matter how often they skipped class, or how little they cared about class when they were in it. For a while there I thought you thought the world started yesterday.)

Why should .gov be responsible for anything you do? There seems to be an awful lot of stuff you agree with me on, regarding, "It's your own damn fault."

but then, you similarly suggest that .gov did something wrong in not managing that?

Rules for parenting -

Is it perfectly acceptable to never send your child to school and/or homeschool your child?

Is it perfectly acceptable to beat your child?
(to what extent allowable by law?)

Is it perfectly acceptable to leave your child unattended in a vehicle?

Schools - Why are so many pathetic teachers still teaching?
Why do the teachers that manage to get fired, go to work at another school?

Could this be a reason for the piss poor "education" demonstrated by so many kids, and their parents these days?

Unions?

What does .gov have to do with unions?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rm-Fx5jTbPE&NR=1


As for the TV.. I don't own one, but I installed cable for a while, I know a lot about em, and a lot more about the people that use em like a crackhead uses crack cocaine.

Why would you turn off what keeps you going? Why is TV what so many people use to "keep going"?


A trip back to 1912, courtesy of WW
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8-jr8...eature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RcnbDQKsBoE

He sounds just like Obama! All about doing the right thing, and collective advancements, and damn those evil corporations!

My my, you really do read the articles thoroughly don't you ... because, if you had done a little more than skim the title of the article you would have noticed that the sources are REAL news agencies and REAL people (some of them even authority figures).

Yes, I must admin, I do invest in shark liver oil ... the squalene it contains is really good for your health I hear ... so are radioactive baths. In fact there's a place in Austria I've been to that has radioactive baths for health purposes. (I didn't stay around long enough to try it, I left right after I heard they had radioactive baths in the area). Oh, and had you been reading the previous article you might have noticed shark liver oil as being an ingredient in the vaccine ...

I know your mentality, I know how you think, I don't think there's any point in me arguing on this topic with you, it is a waste of time and keystrokes. So I will not (even tho I just did in a way).

Texan Mexican Deuce H, don't forget that other people read stuff, too. You're not JUST arguing with someone, you're providing information for anyone who might find your point of view interesting.

If you value your message at all, you should continue to voice it at every opportunity. Don't stop just because the person you're having dialogue with isn't receptive, or tolerant of your viewpoint.

That doesn't answer the question I asked.
You said that companies like Monsanto and others negatively affect the environment (and yourself), so how does giving them even more power and room to do whatever the hell they want going to force them to act responsibly? They are driven by profit, and if cleaning up their waste isn't profitable then they won't do it.

There has to be some form of regulatory body that forces them to function in a cleaner and more environmentally friendly manner to prevent them from harming you.
Yet, you advocate almost doing away with the government and that probably means the EPA and other related agencies.

*In a robotic voice* "DOES NOT COMPUTE!".

You're not thinking far enough along the line..

If companies like Monsanto didn't get so many contracts with people who are looking for a cheaper way to do something, because of all the regulations regarding the "right" way to do something -- imposed on them by people supporting your position, then Monsanto wouldn't exist.


Furthermore, if people didn't fall for stuff so easily, as "the cheapest thing on the shelf is the best thing for me." then that would also be true.

*in a robotic voice* TO ANSWER BLUNTLY, WE ARE THE REGULATORY FORCE. COMPUTE.


Course that's never gunna work with an army of idiots constantly complaining about whatever the TV tells them to complain about, so we gotta do something about the education system first.

I don't think so. In this case it was clear he just read the titles.

Again, I'm not here to convince anyone, it's not possible for me to convince anyone anyway.

You could say that all I want is to infuse doubt into people. I don't want to convince them, I don't want to tell them what to do and not to do, I just want them to think about the issue.

Sure, maybe everything I said was indeed BS, at least you have a chance to think about whether it really was BS or maybe there's something behind it all.

I have to admit I am somewhat of a conspiracy theorist. But, not in the way that you think. I don't simply believe what other people say. My way of going about it is the way sophists used to. Find truth through argument. I can argue for any side that I want, but that does not mean that I believe it. In fact, it's better to argue for the side that you are not inclined to believe, because that reduces your personal bias in the argument and prevents your emotions from being involved, which would lead to heated and disorderly arguments ... like have been demonstrated here.

I can imagine that it could well be that the vaccine actually works, and that it may protect those that take it against a pathogen that is not here yet or maybe it is. But, there are so many things that don't fit, and to me they scream "Watch out !", and I can't ignore them. Usually I think on these things myself, I run the scenarios through in my mind, over and over, to try to see what the best thing to do is. I'm pretty sure that something is going to happen, some outbreak somewhere, maybe even a pandemic, maybe nothing at all. Yet, I have to hope for the best, but prepare for the worst. If and when something does happen, what should I do.

I don't trust anyone to do anything in my interest. From my experiences on this miserable rock called Earth, this is the most important think to keep in mind. That nobody here has any interest in my well-being, all they want is money. That may be cynical, mean, insane, paranoid ... call it whatever you want, but I have found out the hard way that it is the truth. I need to prepare by myself for myself, and I will be responsible for what happens to me, and that's the way it should be.

The only thing is, I can't think of everything that can happen, and may be wrong about what most likely will happen. But, every day that I think on this issue, a new possibility comes up, I revise my plan of action. The next day, I think on it again, using maybe more info that has come out, I revise the plan again. And on and on until maybe the plan will actually work in the end.

However, I cannot argue with people that start hurling insults, that do not read on the issue or things that I post, that call "BS" all the time, that refuse to even properly argue. It's more like fighting or trolling, it's not arguing. Well, I can't hope for much more I guess.

Goodness, I hate writing long posts like this one.

This is rich, coming from a person who can't see the consequences of exponential resource consumption and population growth.

When was the last time you grew your own vegetables or "voted with your wallet" even if it meant you had to pay much more than necessary.
Do you make sure that all the food you eat has not been "touched" by Monsanto, and that ALL the products you buy are from sources that have your and everyone else's best interest at heart?
And even if you do, it will have no impact without a significant number of people behind it, hence the necessity to force said companies to behave responsibly.

You claim it is my position that has caused this? WTF?! Your idea of lack of regulations and just let everyone do what they want is what allows companies like Monsanto to behave like they do.

This is another contradiction. Because how are you going to reform the education system where there has to at least be some standard to uphold (and again, a regulatory body to enforce the standard!) if each school is just left to its own devices, since you don't want the government to be involved in ANYTHING.

And then you will also have the people, who like the anti-vaccine lunatics, will say "I's gonna homeschool mah kids, yukyukyuk!" or "I don't want your poisonous brainwashing you call education!".
So stupidity and ignorance will continue to exist (and probably be even more rampant) in this supposed utopic anarchy you envision.

We called BS on your arguments because they are BS.
For example: you still haven't retracted your earlier statements claiming that vaccines contain hazardous levels of elemental mercury after demonstrating that they don't; ditto on your claim that ALL vaccines contain squaline including the influenza vaccine; you have flatly ignored real sources of mercury contamination for some bizarre reason. All of this even after being given plenty of hard evidence from credible and peer-reviewed sources.
The only conclusion is that you aren't interested in accuracy or evidence.

One last thing to you personally TeX: even if you or other people contract the virus, don't take the shot and pull through just fine, do the responsible thing and at least quarantine yourself until you are no longer infectious. Just because you can manage to fight off the virus on your own doesn't mean you can waltz around infecting other people who's immune systems may not be as capable as yours.
If you don't want to take the vaccine, that is just fine. Just don't be responsible for passing the virus to someone who will die from it. That death will be on you.