NATION

PASSWORD

Who'd commit to this?

For discussion and debate about anything. (Not a roleplay related forum; out-of-character commentary only.)
User avatar
Barringtonia
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 9908
Founded: Feb 05, 2007
Ex-Nation

Who'd commit to this?

Postby Barringtonia » Wed Oct 28, 2009 11:49 pm

Possibly a little tl;dr for most but...

In six years of studying economics, not once did I hear the word "ecology". So if it hadn't have been for the chance purchase of a video called Gandhi in the final term of my degree, I'd probably have ended up earning a fine living in a very respectable job persuading Indian farmers to go GM, or something useful like that. The little chap in the loincloth taught me one huge lesson – to be the change I wanted to see in the world. Trouble was, I had no idea back then what that change was.

After managing a couple of organic food companies made me realise that even "ethical business" would never be quite enough, an afternoon's philosophising with a mate changed everything. We were looking at the world's issues – environmental destruction, sweatshops, factory farms, wars over resources – and wondering which of them we should dedicate our lives to. But I realised that I was looking at the world in the same way a western medical practitioner looks at a patient, seeing symptoms and wondering how to firefight them, without any thought for their root cause. So I decided instead to become a social homeopath, a pro-activist, and to investigate the root cause of these symptoms.

One of the critical causes of those symptoms is the fact we no longer have to see the direct repercussions our purchases have on the people, environment and animals they affect. The degrees of separation between the consumer and the consumed have increased so much that we're completely unaware of the levels of destruction and suffering embodied in the stuff we buy. The tool that has enabled this separation is money.

If we grew our own food, we wouldn't waste a third of it as we do today. If we made our own tables and chairs, we wouldn't throw them out the moment we changed the interior decor. If we had to clean our own drinking water, we probably wouldn't contaminate it.

So to be the change I wanted to see in the world, it unfortunately meant I was going to have to give up cash, which I initially decided to do for a year. I got myself a caravan, parked it up on an organic farm where I was volunteering and kitted it out to be off-grid. Cooking would now be outside – rain or shine – on a rocket stove; mobile and laptop would be run off solar; I'd use wood I either coppiced or scavenged to heat my humble abode, and a compost loo for humanure.

Food was the next essential. There are four legs to the food-for-free table: foraging wild food, growing your own, bartering, and using waste grub, of which there is loads. On my first day, I fed 150 people a three-course meal with waste and foraged food. Most of the year, though, I ate my own crops.

To get around, I had a bike and trailer, and the 34-mile commute to the city doubled up as my gym subscription. For loo roll I'd relieve the local newsagents of its papers (I once wiped my arse with a story about myself); it's not double-quilted, but I quickly got used to it. For toothpaste I used washed-up cuttlefish bone with wild fennel seeds, an oddity for a vegan.

What have I learned? That friendship, not money, is real security. That most western poverty is of the spiritual kind. That independence is really interdependence. And that if you don't own a plasma screen TV, people think you're an extremist.

People often ask me what I miss about my old world of lucre and business. Stress. Traffic jams. Bank statements. Utility bills.

Well, there was the odd pint of organic ale with my mates down the local.

• Mark Boyle is the founder of The Freeconomy Community


Would you, could you, give everything up to live like this?

What's stopping you?

(note he does laptop off solar power so NSG should still be feasible)
I hear babies cry, I watch them grow
They'll learn much more than I'll ever know
And I think to myself, what a wonderful world



User avatar
Maurepas
Post Czar
 
Posts: 36403
Founded: Apr 17, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Maurepas » Wed Oct 28, 2009 11:53 pm

No, admittedly tl;dr, but I skimmed for gist...

Im lazy, and dont want to, and atm, dont have to...tbqh...

User avatar
Barringtonia
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 9908
Founded: Feb 05, 2007
Ex-Nation

Postby Barringtonia » Wed Oct 28, 2009 11:55 pm

Maurepas wrote:No, admittedly tl;dr, but I skimmed for gist...

Im lazy, and dont want to, and atm, dont have to...tbqh...


I had the idea of walking back home, which given I'm in HK and 'home' is technically the UK, would be quite a trip.

I doubt I'd need much at all, I can't remember which author did this but they just left without warning leaving just a note on their office desk 'Gone to Patagonia'.

I like that.
I hear babies cry, I watch them grow
They'll learn much more than I'll ever know
And I think to myself, what a wonderful world



User avatar
Gauntleted Fist
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 10061
Founded: Aug 17, 2008
Ex-Nation

Postby Gauntleted Fist » Thu Oct 29, 2009 12:01 am

I could survive like that if I had to.

By no means would I want to, however. I am a creature that enjoys its comforts. I am also selfish.

Which produces a bad combination for giving up my "way of existence".

So, could I? Yes.

Would I, if given a choice? No.

User avatar
Alsatian Knights
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1323
Founded: Dec 21, 2008
Ex-Nation

Postby Alsatian Knights » Thu Oct 29, 2009 12:08 am

When I hear the word "ecology" I think of sim City 2000. I''ve never really been a big fan of organic food, or any of that stuff either.
Qwendra has been resurrected and is looking for players who want to start anew and shape a government!

User avatar
Barringtonia
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 9908
Founded: Feb 05, 2007
Ex-Nation

Postby Barringtonia » Thu Oct 29, 2009 12:11 am

Gauntleted Fist wrote:By no means would I want to, however. I am a creature that enjoys its comforts.


I wonder if you'd realise those creature comforts aren't really creature comforts after all.

People often ask me what I miss about my old world of lucre and business. Stress. Traffic jams. Bank statements. Utility bills.


Gauntleted Fist wrote:I am also selfish.


..and that when it counts, when you realise that interdependence is a very comforting thing, you might not consider yourself so selfish.

What have I learned? That friendship, not money, is real security. That most western poverty is of the spiritual kind. That independence is really interdependence. And that if you don't own a plasma screen TV, people think you're an extremist.


On another note, when one says 'I am selfish', that is very rarely true - it simply means you're selfish in certain situations. Philosophers believe in a persons' character, psychologists know that our 'character' is very much determined by circumstance. Or in other words, philosophers believe our character bleeds into everything we do whereas psychologists know everything we do bleeds into our character.
I hear babies cry, I watch them grow
They'll learn much more than I'll ever know
And I think to myself, what a wonderful world



User avatar
Gauntleted Fist
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 10061
Founded: Aug 17, 2008
Ex-Nation

Postby Gauntleted Fist » Thu Oct 29, 2009 12:24 am

Barringtonia wrote:
Gauntleted Fist wrote:By no means would I want to, however. I am a creature that enjoys its comforts.


I wonder if you'd realise those creature comforts aren't really creature comforts after all.
I have personal experience with the sort of existence this person is describing. Suffice to say that I would have...had some very choice words to say to him if he asked me how I felt about continuing to live like that after I returned to my "normal" lifestyle.

Barringtonia wrote:On another note, when one says 'I am selfish', that is very rarely true - it simply means you're selfish in certain situations. Philosophers believe in a persons' character, psychologists know that our 'character' is very much determined by circumstance. Or in other words, philosophers believe our character bleeds into everything we do whereas psychologists know everything we do bleeds into our character.
It is a rare situation in which my first thought is not "How does this benefit me?"

So, I suppose you are correct, in that I am not totally selfish. Only that I am selfish in most situations, because I seek to benefit myself before all others. If others benefit, that's just a bonus.
Last edited by Gauntleted Fist on Thu Oct 29, 2009 12:25 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Lucky Bicycle Works
Diplomat
 
Posts: 884
Founded: Jul 08, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Lucky Bicycle Works » Thu Oct 29, 2009 12:35 am

Barringtonia wrote:Possibly a little tl;dr for most but...

In six years of studying economics, *snip*

• Mark Boyle is the founder of The Freeconomy Community


Would you, could you, give everything up to live like this?

What's stopping you?

(note he does laptop off solar power so NSG should still be feasible)


What is stopping me is (a) all the bloody work, (b) not wanting to be completely marginalized, and (c) a persuasion that while "waste food" is a viable source for a few people at a time, it's not an option which is available if you're poor in the way that the poorest in the world are: ie, their entire country is poor and there isn't any waste food. The solar panels to run a laptop would cost years of the best wage they're likely to get. In other words, there is lots of "waste" in rich countries and while it is admirable that someone use that instead of letting it go to waste, it's hardly a general solution to poverty.

I'm thinking more of a parallel currency, an 'ethical currency' if you like. While it might seem complicated, the audit trail is there already in all the financial transactions which bring a product to our stores. There is no financial incentive for anyone to disclose the ecological or human-suffering costs of a product which is 'expensive' that way, but this is only because such a 'currency' doesn't exist yet. It is very imperfectly simulated by "product claims" but there is no reason it not be as legally binding as financial transactions, and misleading a consumer to be considered fraud.

When fully implemented, it would be just as disastrous to go ethically bankrupt as it currently is to lose your credit rating. Both forms of transaction would happen in parallel (any time money changes hands, the positive or negative ethical value would have to be reckoned too) and both would be legally enforceable, on individuals and on corporations. An implication of this, is that wages would also involve a transfer of ethical "money." Most jobs would earn credit, though it is not inconceivable that some might come with a debit instead ... meaning that the person has to spend some of the money they earned on 'high ethical value' spending in order not to go 'ethically broke.'

And perhaps an exchange market would arise, for those people who are flush with good deeds but need money for the rent ... and those who have plenty of money but a bad conscience. Basically, one person would pay another for being good. It's hard to imagine how to ban that, in fact, without outlawing charitable donations.

Or some hybrid, a limitation of the proportion of each kind of income which can be exchanged for the other. Not unlike how one can "tax deduct" a certain amount of charitable spending, but only up to a point.

And how is the "ethical price" assessed? Well, that's complicated and it's going to look more like a legal or political process than a marketplace. It will impose an overhead on monetary transactions.

Yet I think the overhead might be less significant than what could be expected in losses if everyone lived without money, to avoid all the harm which can be hidden by money. Who is going to make your solar cells, let alone your laptop? Some holier-than-thou hippy in a van, and the 'company' they could form on a handshake and a physical exchange of goods? I don't think so.

The barter economy might work for horseshoes and pumpkins, but a barter economy on the scale necessary to produce laptops (hell, what about the internet itself? ) is going to be fiendishly complicated and simply replicate the same "out of sight out of mind" problems of a global money economy.

This guy wants the best of both worlds. And he's not paying his taxes either.
Lucky Bicycle Works, previously BunnySaurus Bugsii.
"My town is a teacher.
Oh, trucks and beers and memories
All spread out on the road.
Oh, my town is a leader of children,
To where Caution
Is a Long Wide Load"

-- Mark Seymour

User avatar
RightLeaningChristians
Diplomat
 
Posts: 837
Founded: Sep 20, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby RightLeaningChristians » Thu Oct 29, 2009 12:36 am

Sounds wonderful.



Needs moar guns though. How will you protect yourself from homosexual animals?
Emergency Alertness:
Jesus Christ!
God Damnit!
Fuck Me!

User avatar
Allbeama
Senator
 
Posts: 4367
Founded: May 26, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Allbeama » Thu Oct 29, 2009 12:41 am

It would be a nice way to do things. Good luck getting it to be a major movement in society.
Agonarthis Terra, My Homeworld.
The Internet loves you. mah Factbook

Hope lies in the smouldering rubble of Empires.

User avatar
Kashindahar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1885
Founded: Sep 19, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Kashindahar » Thu Oct 29, 2009 2:09 am

Could I? Yes.

Would I? No. Why would I want to?
no matter how blunt your hammer, someone is still going to mistake it for a nail
Voracious Vendetta wrote:There is always some prick that comes along and ruins a thread before it goes anywhere

User avatar
Barringtonia
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 9908
Founded: Feb 05, 2007
Ex-Nation

Postby Barringtonia » Thu Oct 29, 2009 2:20 am

Kashindahar wrote:Could I? Yes.

Would I? No. Why would I want to?


Probably a little tl;dw this one, perhaps to lengthen one's attention span?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rX7lOk2H8eo
Last edited by Barringtonia on Thu Oct 29, 2009 2:20 am, edited 1 time in total.
I hear babies cry, I watch them grow
They'll learn much more than I'll ever know
And I think to myself, what a wonderful world



User avatar
Charlotte Ryberg
The Muse of the Westcountry
 
Posts: 15007
Founded: Mar 14, 2007
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Charlotte Ryberg » Thu Oct 29, 2009 3:23 am

I may not be able to commit to doing all of it as working for free isn't my thing. However, there is a good point made about self-reliance because there would not be conflicts for resources globally, albeit it may not work all the time because not all nations have that one type of resource. Speaking of which, it makes me think, whether recycling is really recycling?

User avatar
Kobrania
Minister
 
Posts: 3446
Founded: May 11, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Kobrania » Thu Oct 29, 2009 3:26 am

I would.
"Only when you acknowledge that your country has done evil and ignore it will you be a patriot." -TJ.

ZIONISM = JUSTIFYING GENOCIDE WITH GOD.

Kobrania, the anti-KMA.

User avatar
Delator
Minister
 
Posts: 2223
Founded: Nov 29, 2004
Ex-Nation

Postby Delator » Thu Oct 29, 2009 4:02 am

Lucky Bicycle Works wrote:
Barringtonia wrote:Possibly a little tl;dr for most but...

In six years of studying economics, *snip*

• Mark Boyle is the founder of The Freeconomy Community


Would you, could you, give everything up to live like this?

What's stopping you?

(note he does laptop off solar power so NSG should still be feasible)


What is stopping me is (a) all the bloody work, (b) not wanting to be completely marginalized, and (c) a persuasion that while "waste food" is a viable source for a few people at a time, it's not an option which is available if you're poor in the way that the poorest in the world are: ie, their entire country is poor and there isn't any waste food. The solar panels to run a laptop would cost years of the best wage they're likely to get. In other words, there is lots of "waste" in rich countries and while it is admirable that someone use that instead of letting it go to waste, it's hardly a general solution to poverty.

I'm thinking more of a parallel currency, an 'ethical currency' if you like. While it might seem complicated, the audit trail is there already in all the financial transactions which bring a product to our stores. There is no financial incentive for anyone to disclose the ecological or human-suffering costs of a product which is 'expensive' that way, but this is only because such a 'currency' doesn't exist yet. It is very imperfectly simulated by "product claims" but there is no reason it not be as legally binding as financial transactions, and misleading a consumer to be considered fraud.

When fully implemented, it would be just as disastrous to go ethically bankrupt as it currently is to lose your credit rating. Both forms of transaction would happen in parallel (any time money changes hands, the positive or negative ethical value would have to be reckoned too) and both would be legally enforceable, on individuals and on corporations. An implication of this, is that wages would also involve a transfer of ethical "money." Most jobs would earn credit, though it is not inconceivable that some might come with a debit instead ... meaning that the person has to spend some of the money they earned on 'high ethical value' spending in order not to go 'ethically broke.'

And perhaps an exchange market would arise, for those people who are flush with good deeds but need money for the rent ... and those who have plenty of money but a bad conscience. Basically, one person would pay another for being good. It's hard to imagine how to ban that, in fact, without outlawing charitable donations.

Or some hybrid, a limitation of the proportion of each kind of income which can be exchanged for the other. Not unlike how one can "tax deduct" a certain amount of charitable spending, but only up to a point.

And how is the "ethical price" assessed? Well, that's complicated and it's going to look more like a legal or political process than a marketplace. It will impose an overhead on monetary transactions.

Yet I think the overhead might be less significant than what could be expected in losses if everyone lived without money, to avoid all the harm which can be hidden by money. Who is going to make your solar cells, let alone your laptop? Some holier-than-thou hippy in a van, and the 'company' they could form on a handshake and a physical exchange of goods? I don't think so.

The barter economy might work for horseshoes and pumpkins, but a barter economy on the scale necessary to produce laptops (hell, what about the internet itself? ) is going to be fiendishly complicated and simply replicate the same "out of sight out of mind" problems of a global money economy.

This guy wants the best of both worlds. And he's not paying his taxes either.



Your ideas are intriguing to me, and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter...
Those that seek to place heel upon the throat of Liberty will fall to the cry of Freedom!

User avatar
Abdju
Minister
 
Posts: 2153
Founded: Jul 01, 2007
Ex-Nation

Postby Abdju » Thu Oct 29, 2009 4:05 am

To the best that I am able, I live in a way that doesn't cause harm to others. To pursue that to the point of beggaring myself is not something I feel an obligation to do, nor any desire to do, and would indeed largely prevent me from meeting my actual obligations.

Left/Right -5.25 | Auth/Lib: +2.57 |
"Objectivism really is a Fountainhead of philosophical diarrhea" - derscon
"God Hates Fags But Says It's Okay to Double Dip" - Gauthier

Great Nepal - Tax supporting environment are useless, we can live without it.
Great Nepal - Lions can't fly. Therefore, eagles are superior.
Turan Cumhuriyeti - no you presented lower quality of brain
Greed and Death - Spanish was an Amerindian language.
Sungai Pusat - No, I know exactly what happened. The Titanic had left USA's shores and somewhere near the Arctic Circle
Derscon - I let Jews handle my money, not my penis.
Fevolo - i'm not talking about catholics. i'm talking about christians.

User avatar
Greed and Death
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 53383
Founded: Mar 20, 2008
Ex-Nation

Postby Greed and Death » Thu Oct 29, 2009 9:52 am

This is how all environmental activist should exist.
"Trying to solve the healthcare problem by mandating people buy insurance is like trying to solve the homeless problem by mandating people buy a house."(paraphrase from debate with Hilary Clinton)
Barack Obama

User avatar
Muravyets
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 12755
Founded: Aug 18, 2005
Ex-Nation

Postby Muravyets » Thu Oct 29, 2009 10:16 am

Abdju wrote:To the best that I am able, I live in a way that doesn't cause harm to others. To pursue that to the point of beggaring myself is not something I feel an obligation to do, nor any desire to do, and would indeed largely prevent me from meeting my actual obligations.

This.^^

Further, it's all very well for one person to go back to the land, off the grid, the whole Walden scene, etc, when, like the guy in the OP story and Henry David Thoreau himself, they actually have a relatively affluent life to go back to in developed reality to which they stay connected in case of emergencies. It's great if they do it for a year or two to make a very valuable point about the lack of necessity and excesses of waste in modern consumerist lifestyles.

But the global population is such that there is no way any place could support everyone in it growing their own food, drilling for their own water, etc. Living like that would be an excellent way to promote the spread of disease, just like it was back when we invented all the modern conveniences -- like sewage treatment -- that protect us from those diseases, such as cholera. Just take a look at any refugee camp for evidence of that.

If the OP story-guy can make people in the affluent world actually THINK about how they are living and what they are doing, that's great. Otherwise, it strikes me as just another affluent person playing at being poor and claiming it's not so bad. The OP story-guy seems to have started out to do the former, but when he talks about hosting a feast on waste food, etc, he sounds like the latter.
Last edited by Muravyets on Thu Oct 29, 2009 10:19 am, edited 1 time in total.
Kick back at Cafe Muravyets
And check out my other RP, too. (Don't take others' word for it -- see for yourself. ;) )
I agree with Muravyets because she scares me. -- Verdigroth
However, I am still not the topic of this thread.

User avatar
Ashmoria
Post Czar
 
Posts: 46718
Founded: Mar 19, 2004
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Ashmoria » Thu Oct 29, 2009 10:19 am

Barringtonia wrote:Possibly a little tl;dr for most but...

Would you, could you, give everything up to live like this?

What's stopping you?

(note he does laptop off solar power so NSG should still be feasible)


no i would not.

because i am utterly uninterested in living this way.
whatever

User avatar
Ashmoria
Post Czar
 
Posts: 46718
Founded: Mar 19, 2004
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Ashmoria » Thu Oct 29, 2009 10:20 am

Barringtonia wrote:
Maurepas wrote:No, admittedly tl;dr, but I skimmed for gist...

Im lazy, and dont want to, and atm, dont have to...tbqh...


I had the idea of walking back home, which given I'm in HK and 'home' is technically the UK, would be quite a trip.

I doubt I'd need much at all, I can't remember which author did this but they just left without warning leaving just a note on their office desk 'Gone to Patagonia'.

I like that.

that would be a cool trip! how long do you think it would take you to walk through china?
whatever

User avatar
Ashmoria
Post Czar
 
Posts: 46718
Founded: Mar 19, 2004
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Ashmoria » Thu Oct 29, 2009 10:23 am

Lucky Bicycle Works wrote:
Barringtonia wrote:Possibly a little tl;dr for most but...

In six years of studying economics, *snip*

• Mark Boyle is the founder of The Freeconomy Community


Would you, could you, give everything up to live like this?

What's stopping you?

(note he does laptop off solar power so NSG should still be feasible)


What is stopping me is (a) all the bloody work, (b) not wanting to be completely marginalized, and (c) a persuasion that while "waste food" is a viable source for a few people at a time, it's not an option which is available if you're poor in the way that the poorest in the world are: ie, their entire country is poor and there isn't any waste food. The solar panels to run a laptop would cost years of the best wage they're likely to get. In other words, there is lots of "waste" in rich countries and while it is admirable that someone use that instead of letting it go to waste, it's hardly a general solution to poverty.

I'm thinking more of a parallel currency, an 'ethical currency' if you like. While it might seem complicated, the audit trail is there already in all the financial transactions which bring a product to our stores. There is no financial incentive for anyone to disclose the ecological or human-suffering costs of a product which is 'expensive' that way, but this is only because such a 'currency' doesn't exist yet. It is very imperfectly simulated by "product claims" but there is no reason it not be as legally binding as financial transactions, and misleading a consumer to be considered fraud.

When fully implemented, it would be just as disastrous to go ethically bankrupt as it currently is to lose your credit rating. Both forms of transaction would happen in parallel (any time money changes hands, the positive or negative ethical value would have to be reckoned too) and both would be legally enforceable, on individuals and on corporations. An implication of this, is that wages would also involve a transfer of ethical "money." Most jobs would earn credit, though it is not inconceivable that some might come with a debit instead ... meaning that the person has to spend some of the money they earned on 'high ethical value' spending in order not to go 'ethically broke.'

And perhaps an exchange market would arise, for those people who are flush with good deeds but need money for the rent ... and those who have plenty of money but a bad conscience. Basically, one person would pay another for being good. It's hard to imagine how to ban that, in fact, without outlawing charitable donations.

Or some hybrid, a limitation of the proportion of each kind of income which can be exchanged for the other. Not unlike how one can "tax deduct" a certain amount of charitable spending, but only up to a point.

And how is the "ethical price" assessed? Well, that's complicated and it's going to look more like a legal or political process than a marketplace. It will impose an overhead on monetary transactions.

Yet I think the overhead might be less significant than what could be expected in losses if everyone lived without money, to avoid all the harm which can be hidden by money. Who is going to make your solar cells, let alone your laptop? Some holier-than-thou hippy in a van, and the 'company' they could form on a handshake and a physical exchange of goods? I don't think so.

The barter economy might work for horseshoes and pumpkins, but a barter economy on the scale necessary to produce laptops (hell, what about the internet itself? ) is going to be fiendishly complicated and simply replicate the same "out of sight out of mind" problems of a global money economy.

This guy wants the best of both worlds. And he's not paying his taxes either.

i love that ethical currency idea. but of course it would be completely corrupted not unlike the healthy food seal thingy that allowed froot loops to be marked as a healthy choice for breakfast.
whatever

User avatar
Dolbri
Chargé d'Affaires
 
Posts: 463
Founded: Mar 17, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Dolbri » Thu Oct 29, 2009 10:24 am

I was preparing a lengthy response, but basically, Bicycle said it best:

Lucky Bicycle Works wrote:This guy wants the best of both worlds.
"Every man takes the limits of his own field of vision for the limits of the world." ~Schopenhauer
Project Gutenberg needs your help

User avatar
Andaluciae
Negotiator
 
Posts: 5766
Founded: Antiquity
Ex-Nation

Postby Andaluciae » Thu Oct 29, 2009 10:25 am

I like my high value added products, thank you very much.
FreeAgency wrote:Shellfish eating used to be restricted to dens of sin such as Red Lobster and Long John Silvers, but now days I cannot even take my children to a public restaurant anymore (even the supposedly "family friendly ones") without risking their having to watch some deranged individual flaunting his sin...

User avatar
Dolbri
Chargé d'Affaires
 
Posts: 463
Founded: Mar 17, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Dolbri » Thu Oct 29, 2009 10:30 am

Andaluciae wrote:I like my high value added products, thank you very much.

Priceless :)

Whether or not you're being sarcastic, you just proved the guy's point.
"Every man takes the limits of his own field of vision for the limits of the world." ~Schopenhauer
Project Gutenberg needs your help

User avatar
Andaluciae
Negotiator
 
Posts: 5766
Founded: Antiquity
Ex-Nation

Postby Andaluciae » Thu Oct 29, 2009 10:42 am

Dolbri wrote:
Andaluciae wrote:I like my high value added products, thank you very much.

Priceless :)

Whether or not you're being sarcastic, you just proved the guy's point.


I'm not being sarcastic, and the guy is wrong. If we want to maintain the current standard of living we experience in the west, then we can't toss of the globalized world we've developed. It's that simple.

Mark Boyle is a dirty hippie. I hope he gets pneumonia and has to take penicillin.
FreeAgency wrote:Shellfish eating used to be restricted to dens of sin such as Red Lobster and Long John Silvers, but now days I cannot even take my children to a public restaurant anymore (even the supposedly "family friendly ones") without risking their having to watch some deranged individual flaunting his sin...

Next

Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to General

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Ameriganastan, Benuty, Bovad, Land of Corporations, Renovated Germany, The Pirateariat

Advertisement

Remove ads