by sowhatnow 7 Replies latest social current
i got an offer in the mail for mother earth magazine.
anyone like it? im not sure if im a liberal or not, i think its a liberal based format. its not all political, sort of like a shortened readers digest?
id not think myself to be a republican or conservative but more of a democrat or independent, I HAVE NO IDEA!
anyway is it worth the 10 bucks for 6 issues?
like to read foreign affairs and used to read world policy review, is this more like the week magazine? shorter articles?
I had been a regular reader of that magazine some years back. It along with the Canadian version 'Harrowsmith Country Life' was about back to the earth, self sufficient lifestyle including alternative energy.
Harrowsmith is now gone and I think the format for ME had changed some time back which I didn't find as appealing. If you're interested, you may be able to review copies at your local library.
Here is a link to their web site: http://www.motherearthnews.com/
I have a subscription, but am thinking of canceling it. It's about self-sufficiency, small and large farms, it's a sort of counterculture farmer's magazine. Lots about recycling, alternative energy and building greenhouses from leftover windows, that sort of thing. What's really annoying is that now a lot of their articles point to websites, so the articles are incomplete and you have to go look up the website to read more.It isn't as interesting as it used to be.
my bad!! i meant mother jones, just now going through my pile of junk on my desk and its not mother earth.
sorry!
A quick way to determine if you are Liberal or not. . .
Answer the following hypothetical question:
"If suddenly everybody in the world were miraculously given the same access to education, the same income, the same relative strengths and weaknesses as everybody else--BUT--kept the same personality they have now, in 10 years time DO YOU THINK society would be more or less equal than it is now?"
The reason I say this is a good test of Liberalism is because a professional poker player explained
something to me. He plays in World Series of Poker matches every year. He told me the buy in was the same
for everybody, but it didn't matter.
"Why?" I innocently asked.
"Because there are only two kinds of players: winners and losers. Winners take the trouble to learn and losers
depend on luck."
"If suddenly everybody in the world were miraculously given the same access to education, the same income, the same relative strengths and weaknesses as everybody else--BUT--kept the same personality they have now, in 10 years time DO YOU THINK society would be more or less equal than it is now?"
I don't agree with your poker player. Sure It will still be loosers and winners... But more winners and less loosers than now...
And it's important to take in consideration how the nowadays "winners" win... A lot cheats...and are proud of it!
Then yes it will be winners and loosers... But i bet, If cheating is not allowed, it won't be the same as today..The world is not a poker game...
I think that if everybody had the same background at the beginning, after it's about personal responsability, no more about the chance to live in a place where you can have access to everything... Because most of the winners today depends on the LUCK to be born in the great places!
I prefer the person who are loosers become loosers because they don't make the effort than they born loosers because they born in a place where it's nothing...
I don't mind the world to be more equal, I want the world, at least to be more fair!
terryw that scenario is impossible really, no one has the same strengths.
id be at a loss then to know where I stand.
access to education and additional education, is a human right in my opinion, no one should have to pay out their ass for college and be in debt till they become grandparents.
Id say some countries seem to do quite well having education paid for in taxes. it makes for a more intelligent population and that makes for less strife and poverty.
as for income, that's a difficult call, each job has its own value, nothing can be the same for that. but there are unbalances in pay scale. a man who pushes a wheelbarrow of cement has a difficult job regardless if it requires less skill than say, the bricklayer, but, he should be paid decently for the hard work, as it is necessary to the success of the bricklayer. and as it is laborers often get paid low wages simply because it requires less skill, but is awfully straining on the body. which is why the labor force has such high turnover, you can only work so long in certain fields until you get burn out. like a call center job, now that's brutal, sitting all day in front of a computer glaring your eyes and dealing with complaining people. too many hours, too little reward in many cases.
but thats just my limited view, lol.
