Berkeley CSUA MOTD:Entry 39392
Berkeley CSUA MOTD
 
WIKI | FAQ | Tech FAQ
http://csua.com/feed/
2025/07/09 [General] UID:1000 Activity:popular
7/9     

2005/8/31-9/2 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:39392 Activity:high
8/31    Poll: Did you / are you going to donate more/same/less for the Katrina
        relief effort than what you donated for the South Asia Tsunami relief
        effort?
        More            :
        Same            : .
        Less            : .
        Not decided yet : .
        0               : .
        0 in both cases : ..
        \_ I need to defend my reasoning. Donating after a disaster is like
           volunteering to serve food to starving people during Thanksgiving.
           While the gesture is noble, people need food the other 364 days.
           Just because you are nice one day, doesn't mean these people
           will have the means to survive later on. It is thus a shallow
           gesture, and doesn't solve the root of the problem. I don't
           believe in a one-time effort. I believe in a long term, consist
           solution to the root of the problem, like educating people to
           improve their lives, saving up national treasury for rainy days,
           or better yet, make the drastic move to turn US more like Denmark
           where there are no poor people to kill/starve themselves.
           Unfortunately the US government will never do anything. It has
           a history of irresponsively externalizing problems to someone or
           somewhere else. The US has this mentality that if something goes
           wrong with your life, it is always your fault. Well, that is just
           heartless, selfish, and wrong. Your problem is my problem, and
           my problem is your problem.
           my problem is your problem. Let's help each other out. Help
           me turn the profit oriented, corporate-run America into a nation
           that has more compassion for its people. Join my revolution
           and no one will ever have to worry trivial things like donations.
           Help me a little and everyone will be greatly rewarded.  !che
           \_ This is stupid for many reasons, here are some:
                1. The U.S. government has already allocated billions to
                   save New Orleans. Since we all pay taxes, and since
                   California gets only about 80 cents on the dollar for
                   taxes sent to D.C., we are all already footing the bill.
                2. Americans are amongst the highest, if not the highest,
                   donors in the world. On a per capita basis, Americans will
                   donate more to more causes than any other society on the
                   face of the planet.
                3. America is exceedingly diverse. Denmark isn't. You can't
                   compare a dinky country like Denmark to the U.S. In fact,
                   you can't really compare any country to the U.S. The U.S.
                   is unique in terms of composition of its populace and its
                   place in geopolitics.
                4. The U.S. is also the most generous internationally. It
                   gives out more aid to the world than any other country.
              \_ USA actually ranks close to last in aid on a per-capita basis.
                 http://harpers.org/ExcerptTheChristianParadox.html
           \_ God, I can just feel my brain cells dying. -- ilyas
              \_ !che is pretty anti libertarian. Sorry ilyas, I'll be happy
                 to see self-absorbed people like you die.
                 \_ Almost everybody is self-absorbed including, most assuredly,
                    yourself.  The difference between you and me, is that I am
                    willing to 'live and let live.'  You, on the other hand,
                    wish me dead.  Now lecture me some more about my immorality.
                      -- ilyas
                 \_ Almost everybody is self-absorbed including, most
                    assuredly, yourself.  The difference between you and me,
                    is that I am willing to 'live and let live.'  You, on
                    the other hand, wish me dead.  Now lecture me some more
                    about my immorality. -- ilyas
                    \_ "Almost everyone is self absorbed" is a blatant
                       generalization, and almost certainly false.
                       \_ And calling me self-absorbed without knowing anything
                          about my life is what?  You make me laugh. -- ilyas
                          \_ I wasn't the person that wants you to die.  I
                             want you to live!  The motd would be a less
                             entertaining place without you, ilyas. -pp
                    \_ Can you please explain why there are so many people
                       out there volunteering for nothing in return?
                       \_ Because it makes them feel good.  "But that's not
                          what self-absorbed usually means!" you ll cry.
                          My response: "how did the pp know I was self-absorbed
                          in that sense?" -- ilyas
                    \_ not the pp but I wish you were dead because you can't
                       fucking conform to 80 columns. asshole.
                       \_ You make me proud to call myself a nerd.
           \_ I believe in helping people in both cases dumbass.
              \- "live and let live" when actually "live and 'there is no
                 and'" is just sloganeering. the point is that some people
                 are not "and living" ... without help, the will have a
                 signifiant probability of dying and almost no chance to
                 improve their lot in life [nozick's idea of "life chances"].
                 i believe most of the poverty in this country is not, in
                 jeffrey sachs poignant expression, "the poverty that kills".
                 "live and let live" in the global context [as opposed to
                 say discussions about say social agenda in the us ... drug
                 legalization, assmaster marriage etc] is like saying "i
                 believe in equality ... i am happy not giving medicine to
                 the sick *and* the well". see e.g. A. K. Sen "equallity of
                 what" essay/sppech.
                 what" essay/speech. maybe you can change you slogan to
                 "live and whatever".
                 \_ Partha you don't strike me as particularly dumb, but when
                    it comes to libertarian stuff it's like most of your brain
                    just shuts off.  'Live and let live' is about applications
                    of state power, not a statement about how one ought to live
                    one's life morally.  -- ilyas
                    \_ It warms the cockles of my heart to know that somewhere
                       a taxpayer is being forced at gunpoint to pay for
                       ilyas to write these sentences for us all to see.
                       \_ See, Eli, you don't understand selfish behavior.
                          The libertarian answer to a non-libertarian society
                          is to game it for all it's worth while pointing
                          and laughing.  -- ilyas
                    \- i dont think that is true. i just dont fall for the
                       artificial boundaries libertarians of moderate
                       sophistication draw. first of all, a lot of these
                       people will change their tune when they need the help
                       [orange county bail out] and there really diffcult
                       problems of "too big to fail" [what is the liberaltarian
                       answer to LTCM?]. this thread began with the idea of
                       resource allocation not political liberty, so i think
                       my continuing to think in that mode is not unreasonable.
                       i'm actually fairly libertarian when it comes to
                       people playing on a level playing field except
                       one has to distinguish between "if i were king"
                       and "what do we do now" scenarios that take the
                       the status quo as a given [like you can be opposed
                       to the iraq war yet feel we cant leave now].
                       it may be an interesting academic discussion whether
                       something like federal deposit insurance is a good
                       or bad thing from a libertarian perspective, but i
                       think the libertaian perspective has little to say
                       about what to do about the hundreds of thousands of
                       people dying of malaria. i dont really care if you
                       want to throw terms like "state power" around ...
                       when discussing charity, those are the types of
                       questions that concerns me, not cancer research
                       or school vouchers etc. anyway, i was not making
                       abscract ethical statements like "do not lie" but
                       my conception of "distributive justice".
                       \_ Artificial boundaries my ass.  Do you fall for
                          artificial boundaries between moderate socialists
                          and communists?  Why are libertarians so different
                          all of a sudden?  If voluntary charity concerns you,
                          libertarians have nothing to say about it (not being
                          moral philosophers).  Any other kind of charity falls
                          under the rubric of 'state power.' -- ilyas
                          \- i am not defending socialism, communism, anachists
                             trostskiites, marxists, democrats xtian fruitcakes
                             randroids, bolshvicks, mamuluks, baski bazouks or
                             any other group in particular. there are a couple
                             smart people i list [including the leading light
                             of smart libertarians, nozick]. i am criticizing
                             libertairians here because they are the "live
                             and let live" party. if you want to have a thread
                             on environmental legislation ot affirmative
                             action or regulation of barbers or hollywood's
                             role in diverting $ to pet medical projects
                             i would probably attack some non-libertarian
                             group. i have said before a lot of liberals
                             operate with the assumetion "poor people are
                             stupid" and get defensive when you call them on
                             it. i think they shoudl acknowledge that as an
                             operating assumeption but they cant have it both
                             ways. libertarianism may have more theoretical
                             parsimony but has some big empirical problems.
                             for example if state A > B it not not necessarily
                             true that C "near" A is better than A. see e.g.
                             Cancun Fuck You. for the record, i think
                             televanglists are worse than libertarians.
                             BTW, are you controled in part by Sander Greenland
                             in addition to Judah Pearl? --psb
                             \_ While I am sure you have some choice words to
                                say about certain Christians (perhaps on wall)
                                all I see from you on the motd is libertarian
                                bashing.  Libertarians come across as your
                                favorite political punching bag for some reason,
                                which I find odd because they, as a group, are
                                responsible for none of the things you find
                                annoying (parasite CEOs, etc).  In fact, as a
                                party they are responsible for next to nothing,
                                good or ill.  Why do you care suddenly about
                                my Sith Lords?  I sat in on Greenland's class,
                                and found him annoying.  I couldn't exactly
                                figure out why.  It's 'Judea' btw. -- ilyas
                                \- when i go to parties with communists in
                                   berkeley, then i attack them. i didnt
                                   realize i had to give equal time to who i
                                   "bash" on the wall/motd. maybe you can
                                   search the wall logs/kchang logs for my
                                   comments on ALGOR and BILLARY. it's not
                                   my fault hillary is no longer public enemy
                                   number one. did sander show you his large
                                   telescope?
                                   \_ You know, if he offered to show me his
                                      large telescope, I don't think I would
                                      have taken him up on it.  Do you collect
                                      smart people you know like trophies?
                                      You know, collecting things is the
                                      economic prism through which a
                                      'merchant soul' (Plato) views acquisition
                                      of knowledge. -- ilyas
                                      \- i know ander via the person who was
                                      \- i met sander via the person who was
                                      \- i know sander via the person who was
                                         hiding in the closet in a previous
                                         motd post. i think his house
                                         used to be owned by a sex cult or some
                                      \- i met sander via the chick who was
                                         hidining in the closet in a previous
                                         motd post/wall. i think his house
                                         use to be owned by a sex cult or some
                                         thing like that. that is where he
                                         keeps his large telescope. he also
                                         has a large skaeboard, which i thought
                                         was sort of pecular. hey ididnt know
                                         according to JP terry speed was
                                         involved in the OJ trial.
                          libertarians have nothing to say about it.  Any
                          other kind of charity falls under the rubrik of
                          'state power.' -- ilyas
                                figure out why. -- ilyas
                                         keeps his large telescope.
                                         involved in the OF trial.
2025/07/09 [General] UID:1000 Activity:popular
7/9     

You may also be interested in these entries...
2013/11/25-2014/2/5 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:54754 Activity:nil
11/25   California, model for The Nation:
        http://tinyurl.com/k6crazn
        \_ 'And maybe the transaction would have proceeded faster if Mr.
           Boehner's office hadn't, according to the D.C. exchange, put its
           agent - who was calling to help finish the enrollment - on hold for
           35 minutes, listening to "lots of patriotic hold music."'
	...
2012/11/6-12/18 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:54524 Activity:nil
11/6    Four more years!
        \_ Yay! I look forward to 4 more years of doing absolutely nothing.
           It's a much better outcome than the alternative, which is 4 years
           of regress.
           \_ Can't argue with that.
        \_ Massachusetts went for Obama even though Mitt Romney was its
	...
2012/11/28-12/18 [Politics/Domestic/Crime, Academia/UCLA] UID:54539 Activity:nil
11/28   http://www.businessinsider.com/most-dangerous-colleges-in-america-2012-11#3-university-of-california--berkeley-23
        We are #3! We are #3! Go beah!!!
	...
2012/11/5-12/4 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Reference/Tax] UID:54521 Activity:nil
11/5    "Tax Policy Center in Spotlight for Its Romney Study":
        http://www.csua.org/u/y7m (finance.yahoo.com)
        'A small nonpartisan research center operated by professed "geeks" ...
        found, in short, that Mr. Romney could not keep all of the promises he
        had made on individual tax reform ....  It concluded that Mr. Romney's
        plan, on its face, would cut taxes for rich families and raise them
	...
2012/5/16-7/20 [Politics/Foreign/Europe] UID:54390 Activity:nil
5/16    Can anyone tell me what Greece is hoping for by rejecting austerity?
        From here it seems like the austerity is a pretty generous attempt
        to keep Greece from imploding entirely.   Are they hoping the
        Germans will put them on eternal state welfare, or what?
        Also, why would an outright default mean they must leave the Euro?
        Is it just that they won't be able to pay basic gvmt services
	...
2010/1/21-29 [Reference/Religion, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:53653 Activity:nil
1/20    So I want to give some money to Haiti relief funds and my employer
        \_ SOCIALISM
        is willing to match it, but I am not really that big a fan of
        The Red Cross (they take your donations and then spend them
        however they like, not neccessarily on what you gave it to them for).
        Who else is a good charity? UNICEF?
	...
2010/1/20-21 [Reference/Religion, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:53642 Activity:very high
1/20    So I want to give some money to Haiti relief funds and my employer
        is willing to match it, but I am not really that big a fan of
        The Red Cross (they take your donations and then spend them
        however they like, not neccessarily on what you gave it to them for).
        Who else is a good charity? UNICEF?
        \- I believe after some criticism the Red Cross is better about
	...
2010/1/4-19 [Politics/Domestic/911] UID:53611 Activity:moderate
1/4     Why the fascination with blowing up airplanes? Airports have tight
        security. It doesn't seem worth it. It's far easier to derail a
        train or set off explosives in a crowded place like a theater or
        sporting event. As many or more people will be killed and it will
        still make the news. I don't get why all of our security, and
        apprently much of the terrorist's resources, is focused on airplanes.
	...
2009/2/25-3/3 [Politics/Domestic/President/Reagan] UID:52635 Activity:nil
2/25    Thank you Obama for pledging to reverse much of Reagan's economic
        mess. Thank you!
        http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/02/24/analysis.obama.reagan
        http://www.ireport.com/docs/DOC-219640
        \_ About time. The last 25 years have been a disaster for the middle
           class.
	...
2009/2/9-15 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:52538 Activity:low
2/9     GOP may be "winning" stimulus debate on TeeVee, but they're losing quite
        badly with the public:
        http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/02/another-poll-shows-public-approving-obama-disapproving-gop-on-stimulus.php
        http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/02/poll-obama-way-ahead-of-gop-on-stimulus.php
        \_ Uh, the support for the pork package is falling, and now the CBO
           says we'll get out of the recession without a stimulus.
	...

	...
Cache (5400 bytes)
harpers.org/ExcerptTheChristianParadox.html
Sources Only 40 percent of Americans can name more than four of the Ten Commandme nts, and a scant half can cite any of the four authors of the Gospels. This failure to recal l the specifics of our Christian heritage may be further evidence of our nations educational decline, but it probably doesnt matter all that m uch in spiritual or political terms. Here is a statistic that does matte r: Three quarters of Americans believe the Bible teaches that God helps those who help themselves. That is, three out of four Americans believ e that this uber-American idea, a notion at the core of our current indi vidualist politics and culture, which was in fact uttered by Ben Frankli n, actually appears in Holy Scripture. The thing is, not only is Frankli ns wisdom not biblical; Few ideas could be furth er from the gospel message, with its radical summons to love of neighbor . On this essential matter, most Americansmost American Christiansare simply wrong, as if 75 percent of American scientists believed that Newt on proved gravity causes apples to fly up. When we say we are a Christian nationand, overwhelmingly, we doit means something. People w ho go to church absorb lessons there and make real decisions based on th ose lessons; America is simultaneously the most professedl y Christian of the developed nations and the least Christian in its beha vior. That paradoxmore important, perhaps, than the much touted ability of French women to stay thin on a diet of chocolate and cheeseillumina tes the hollow at the core of our boastful, careening culture. Depe nding on which poll you look at and how the question is asked, somewhere around 85 percent of us call ourselves Christian. It is true that a smaller number of Ameri cansabout 75 percentclaim they actually pray to God on a daily basis, and only 33 percent say they manage to get to church every week. Still, even if that 85 percent overstates actual practice, it clearly represent s aspiration. In fact, there is nothing else that unites more than four fifths of America. Every other statistic one can cite about American beh avior is essentially also a measure of the behavior of professed Christi ans. Thats what America is: a place saturated in Christian identity. This is not a matter of angels dancing on the heads of pins. Christ was pretty specific about what he had in mind for his fo llowers. What if we chose some simple criterionsay, giving aid to the p oorest peopleas a reasonable proxy for Christian behavior? After all, i n the days before his crucifixion, when Jesus summed up his message for his disciples, he said the way you could tell the righteous from the dam ned was by whether theyd fed the hungry, slaked the thirsty, clothed th e naked, welcomed the stranger, and visited the prisoner. In 2004, as a share of our economy, we ranked second to last, after Italy , among developed countries in government foreign aid. Per capita we eac h provide fifteen cents a day in official development assistance to poor countries. And its not because we were giving to private charities for relief work instead. Such funding increases our average daily donation by just six pennies, to twenty-one cents. Its also not because American s were too busy taking care of their own; nearly 18 percent of American children lived in poverty (compared with, say, 8 percent in Sweden). In fact, by pretty much any measure of caring for the least among us you wa nt to proposechildhood nutrition, infant mortality, access to preschool we come in nearly last among the rich nations, and often by a wide marg in. The point is not just that (as everyone already knows) the American nation trails badly in all these categories; its that the overwhelmingl y Christian American nation trails badly in all these categories, catego ries to which Jesus paid particular attention. And its not as if the nu mbers are getting better: the US Department of Agriculture reported la st year that the number of households that were food insecure with hung er had climbed more than 26 percent between 1999 and 2003. This Christian nation also tends to make personal, as opposed to politica l, choices that the Bible would seem to frown upon. Despite the Sixth Co mmandment, we are, of course, the most violent rich nation on earth, wit h a murder rate four or five times that of our European peers. We have p rison populations greater by a factor of six or seven than other rich na tions (which at least should give us plenty of opportunity for visiting the prisoners). Having been told to turn the other cheek, were the only Western democracy left that executes its citizens, mostly in those stat es where Christianity is theoretically strongest. Despite Jesus strong declarations against divorce, our marriages break up at a ratejust over halfthat compares poorly with the European Unions average of about fo ur in ten. That average may be held down by the fact that Europeans marr y less frequently, and by countries, like Italy, where divorce is diffic ult; still, compare our success with, say, that of the godless Dutch, wh ose divorce rate is just over 37 percent. Personal self-disciplinelike, say, keeping your we ight under control? About the Author Bill McKibben, a scholar-in-residence at Middlebury College, is the autho r of many books, including The End of Nature and Wandering Home: A Long Walk Across Americas Most Hopeful Landscape.