Salut!
comment vas tu ajourd'hui? (sp?)
... Enough to get the point !!! ... you are very modest !!!
Myx: Lol! sorry, wrote that over like a 2 hour period, should really proof read! mais, merci.
Ok now here is the deal for them : Those who wants a lot of monney :
(win more on the numbers of sells than the price)
More people in good shape / more economy = more trades = more numbers of sells ! (THEY STILL CAN WIN IF THEY HELP !!!)
Myx: much more succint way than I put it, but yeah, that's my thoughts!
I mean : Acting like US and ALIKE are doing is like eating the egg instead of letting the egg being mature and multiply whith all his ressources ... mores eggs !!! for everyone - even for them
Myx: oh....they're more than that. they're nest robbers. they want all the eggss
IF we don't wan't to be lead by either china or usa and alike and gives the whole world a chance we have to try SOMETHING ! and really get what we deserve
Myx: exactly, what we have now isn't really healthy for many nations. maybe a more fair trade would fail economies miserably, but its worth the risk with hundreds of millions of people in poverty for a variety of reasons, but unfair trade is something the US and the EU can effect if they are willing.
Myxomatosis
JoinedPosts by Myxomatosis
-
13
LOL, He's more than just a pretty Bush
by SixofNine infound this on a web-log and had to share:.
tit for tat retaliation is what destroys global trade and relationships.. and the current chief executive, if it were a pin up girl, would have really big tits.
fancy tat..
-
Myxomatosis
-
13
LOL, He's more than just a pretty Bush
by SixofNine infound this on a web-log and had to share:.
tit for tat retaliation is what destroys global trade and relationships.. and the current chief executive, if it were a pin up girl, would have really big tits.
fancy tat..
-
Myxomatosis
let me just say, Free Trade, as it stands today, is not only crap, but destructive to developing countries, and a major negative force. Thanks in large part to the powerful West, the what I consider beastly World Trade Organization.
Free trade is all about corporate subsidies
The problem with it is it is not really free, I don't really know alot about this, and I am no expert, but I understand the numbers and I understand abject poverty as a result many times of the horrible free trade laws. I'll try and put into words what little I know, and perhaps then you will be interested to read somewhere you can actually learn more :)
For one thing, in agriculture (cos this is the market I know most about...:) the U.S. dept. of Agriculture can and does subsidize farmers HEAVILY (only U.S. farmers of course), causing their own crops to balloon, making SOME very wealthy farmers. (to give you a number:::: the U.S. has paid nearly 20 BILLION dollars a year to crop farmers....and they don't pay taxes, at least, my wealthy as hell relatives who are wheat farmers who make probably twice the income as my parents pay NO TAXES,,,whereas it's over 20,000 a year in taxes going to the government for my fam. but that's a separate issue no?)
This policy of the U.S. (which actually they had promised the international community to start scaling this back....nine years ago...they haven't delivered.) This cheap-grain policy is really beneficial to multinational agribusiness firms, large livestock operators, and importers?not crop farmers, now regularly selling grain below their cost of production. Big business wins.
The protests of the World Trade Organization down in Cancun Mexico last year where they were doing their talks (which got jack nothing accomplished) by the farmers came mostly as a result of America DUMPING its surplus corn onto Mexican markets, at greatly reduced prices since there was such a surplus. This action is absolutely terrible as seen by the effects it has on the Mexican corn farmers. They can't compete. They are not subsidized 13 Dodge Rams farmers. That is one of Mexicos biggest markets and we basically stole it by doing this.
Which is Ironic because of the US own actions against dumping within ITS borders::
Countervailing Duties: The US imposes import tariffs -- often 100% or more -- on goods which the government determines have been dumped.
Of course, the EU does the same, even more it seems, subsidizing 100bn in recent years.
http://www.corpwatch.org/news/PND.jsp?articleid=8450
Anyways, probably someone on the boards who will know more about this, but as to this:
Seattleniceguy: (I was just in Seattle in November btw :)
Maybe someone can humor me on this. If trade is totally free and unregulated,
Myx: That's where most of this misunderstanding comes from. "Free" Trade is HEAVILY regulated.
SNG: doesn't that mean that whatever country can produce the goods cheapest will win,
Myx: not necessarily no. Look at the controversial move of Bush applying tarriffs to imported steel (which was just repealed last month) to protect U.S. steel, not because it was produced CHEAPER...
"The 1995 replacement of GATT by the WTO heightened concern among critics because its stronger enforcement powers represent a further shift in power from citizens and national governments to a global authority run by unelected bureaucrats. Business, academic, and government supporters applaud the WTO as a more muscular sheriff of the world trading system." Sarah Anderson and John Cavanagh
SNG: regardless of what they are doing to the environment or their human workforce? I've been trying to wrap my brain around this problem, because it seems hard to understand it correctly.
Myx: they don't give a damn for the people. with the application of tarrifs, taxes, what have you, the "free trade" can benefit whom it will, whilst crippling nations with less power. The U.S. has immense power, if the U.S. were to reduce it's import tarriffs on some African goods by 1% it would not only compensate for, but exceed the actual amount of financial humanitarian aid they receive from the U.S., is that not a bit screwed up????
"Under the WTO, a nation cannot discriminate against products on the basis of how they are produced?be it by child labor or with environmentally destructive technologies. U.S. law, for example, has banned tuna imports from countries that allow long circular nets designed to catch tuna, but which also trapped and killed numerous dolphins. Yet in the eyes of the WTO, a can of tuna is a can of tuna, whether dolphins were killed in the production process or not."
Yeah, Fair Trade is different from "Free" Trade as it would place restrictions on imports based on concerns for environmental, labor aspects. In other words, Free Trade is business. Fair Trade is saying, hey, if you underpay your workforce, violate human rights in the production of your goods, or if you are in offense of environmental standards, you won't be getting our business.
Myx: hopefully!
SNG: If the US were to go ahead with fair trade, wouldn't that seal the fate of many domestic industries, such as steel, since other nations can produce it more plentifully and cheaply?
Myx: Well, I'm not sure, but it doesn't seem to necessarilly be simply who produces it "cheapest" in fact, I would think that if fair trade were to supercede free trade, then it would become necessary to pay employees and producers at least a fair amount, making the big corporations who like to prey on where they can acquire it cheapest, more balanced. Because they would have to settle for less profit for the big guys, whilst giving an actual livable salary to the workers. Of course, this is just one consequence... So, it would put them in a hard place, not having this gaping differential in labor where it's obvious who they'll choose. It will do more to even the markets, and I don't think that would see the downfall of American industries. We cannot be hindered in making trade fair for the world by a potential occurence when it is so clear and obvious, the discrepancy so massive, that it is vital that a change be made.
Here's a little bit on the NAFTA agreement, by the illustrious Noam Chomsky, it rather illustrates who benefits from 'free' trade....of course this is the North American agreement, but I think it's indicative of what happens in other sectors concerning free trade:
http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Chomsky/ChomOdon_FreeTrade.html
Is the idea that this would occur until said nations' currency was on par with the dollar, at which point it might be economically feasible to produce steel domestically again? Is the idea that fair trade gradually brings all participating nations to the same economic plane, even if it means massive upheavals during the process?
Myx: I might be wrong. I have very limited knowledge really, there's alot I don't know, but I would think That's not really it. It's more paying the peoples what they actually deserve, it would really make the big corporations accountable to pay producers in poorer countries they basically loot at this point what would be fair. I don't think that's the general idea, to bring nations currecy on par with the dollar. Though, the West does cripple developing countries through heavy taxation and tarriffs, protecting its markets. What is vital is that those discrimatory, I would say criminal practices be halted, but the ultimate goal is to help suffering countries, and stop powering through with crippling regulations because we can, and it is in some 'special' interests.
Thanks for any info or resources.
Myx: One of the best Websites that I'm a member that is really doing a fantastic job with awareness, and very proactive with regard to reform is the non-profit group Oxfam.
www.MakeTradeFair.com
www.Oxfam.org
I probably gave you alot of information that doesn't relate to what you were asking, but I though I put in my 50 cent. there's lots of great sites on the web re: WTO, trade, free trade. Fair trade is not perfect, but I do believe it is better.
hope everyone on the board is well!
Myxomatosis
two organizations share the initials WT....both seem to be intrisically filth. -
7
My story in part.........
by What The....... inwell i guess i should give you my story as of now.
i have been a jw now for about 6 years and have been the model witness.
about a year ago i started reading my bible and writing down verses that i didn?t understand.
-
Myxomatosis
Hello Whatthe....
How are you! When I read this, it sounded EXTREMELY similar to this audio I was listening to the other day, go to this link, and move down to the Kevin Quick audio, and remember, if the Bible cannot be understood without the Watch Tower, if it is in darkness without the Watch Tower aid, that means that it is either the Bible that is in darkness, ,,, or the Watch Tower. It's awesome that you are studying Scriptures on your own and you can see the indescrepancy....ALSO, the Chapter in Raymond Franz book "Crisis of Conscience" "Point of Decision" specifically pages 283-85 deal with THIS very thing, how it came to be in the late 70's, and it disturbed his conscience too. Yes, the Bible does teach that Jesus Christ is the mediator for ALL MEN. "one mediator between GOD and MAN, and that is the man JESUS CHRIST."
"And we still urge, as in the past, that each reader study the subjects we present in the light of the Scriptures, proving all things by the Scriptures, accepting what they see to be thus approved, and rejecting all else."
Zion's Watch Tower and Herald of Christ's Presence December 15 1896 (reprint) p.2080 -
15
Is This a False Quote From AWAKE! ?
by Myxomatosis ini've had two witnesses tell me that this is false (apostrate) info from the 5/22/94 awake!
i got it from the page of the ajwrb website, and it's supposedly from p. 2 of awake!
they tell me that's wrong...so...is it out of context?
-
Myxomatosis
Thank you everyone! I'm first of all very releaved that the quote was not misinformation, because I'm so used to hearing that the info re: the WT or related to it is just false especially on the evil internet satan sites (riiiiight)
Certainly "numerous" children have died :( in accord with this worthless policy.
I don't care if it's 1000, 234, or 15. ONE IS TOO MANY!!
*glares in the general direction of Brooklyn*
Just like ONE WAS TOO MANY with the organ transplant rule.
and its so sadly ironic that the biblical cause for abstination from eating it, is ,,,,the SACREDNESS of LIFE.
:(
here's hoping that this policy gets the boot YESTERDAY
Myxomatosis -
15
Is This a False Quote From AWAKE! ?
by Myxomatosis ini've had two witnesses tell me that this is false (apostrate) info from the 5/22/94 awake!
i got it from the page of the ajwrb website, and it's supposedly from p. 2 of awake!
they tell me that's wrong...so...is it out of context?
-
Myxomatosis
I've had two witnesses tell me that this is false (apostrate) info from the 5/22/94 AWAKE!
I got it from the page of the AJWRB Website, and it's supposedly from p. 2 of AWAKE! They tell me that's wrong...so...is it out of context? Is this what it really says?
"In former times thousands of youths died for putting God first. They are still doing it, only today the drama is payed out in hospitals and courtrooms, with blood transfusions the issue."
They do mean by saying "Thousands of youths have DIED" that this is on account of their blood policy, or is it just in general?
I have no way to check this (naturally) I don't have any AWAKE! mags...could someone help me? Anyone have a scan, or maybe could put it in context if its not.
danke schon
Myxomatosis -
4
"Wicked System?" Which one? Why?
by robhic ini keep hearing about the so-called "wicked sytem of things" and how it is gonna end "soon.
" (whenever that may be...) just what system is gonna end?
democracy?
-
Myxomatosis
I keep hearing about the so-called "wicked sytem of things" and how it is gonna end "soon."
Myx: You know that's one of the phrases that I have a physiological reaction (basically, I nearly start convulsing, twitch twitch)
It's the most idiotic sounding thing..
and there's this Jehovah's Witness gentleman who moved in around my area,
and he had stopped by the house before, so he knew my face (for a brief few seconds til my Mum pointed them graciously out the door!)
well, I go for a walk on our road,
and he's driving by and sees me and stops, and I swear not 10 seconds into speaking to me does he look at me with that "knowing" look very seriously and say
"You know, it's very near to the end of this wicked system of things"
arrrrghhh twitch! splutter! but I held my peace (i physically restrained myself from spitting on his car) and put my hand on my chin and bobbed my head up and down 'yup yup'
I hear it's soon? Sometime with in this generation?
Myxomatosis -
15
Existing in the nature of God
by ClassAvenger ini preached to a jw and they used the following verse against me:
phi 2:6
"who existing in the nature of god, did not consider being equal to god something to be held onto," he said that this was one of the texts that disproved the trinity because it does not state that he was god, but that he existed in the nature of god: divine.
-
Myxomatosis
Hey Dean
thanks for your replies.
Myx: kein problem
I appreciate your comments and please accept my apologies if I was a little 'severe' in my comments.
Myx: Hey it's cool baby! I probably am just getting a little of what I give (hint: I dish out alot of insults) on a daily basis to Jehovah's Witness I debate. Yes, I am far their superior lol
It is just the fact that this is a 'pet subject' of mine to which I have gone to some lengths to study and research.
So I get a little irksome when I see the facts being misrepresented.
Myx: That's fine, I've done alot of skip hop over here and back here, and all over the place studying, that's when I get in trouble, cos I was answering you from memory which is scattered. I understand...I've seen it with my debates for six months now. It's like WRONG! slap slap slap
I have to say that from your initial response I got the impression that you were being a bit cheeky with me. It is difficult to gauge the actual ' tone' of posted comments when they are read. So I accept that I may have misjudged your tone and for that I apologise and hope I wasn't too cheeky myself.
Myx: Really? No, twasn't in a cheeky mood..and that's one of the most frustrating things about MB, it's all about how the other person PERCEIVES you said it, not necessarily how you meant it. I enjoy the cheeky. just don't be insulting my exegesis, fool!
With regard to the Bible , yes I do have a high regard for it and I continue to try and understand it better with an open mind. However there are some subjects like the trinity that I believe I have a fixed understanding and position on.
Myx: Well, I probably have a fixed idea too. Although, we never really heard the word "trinity" growing up you know.. We were always taught about the gospels, the life of Christ, not doctrine. So I'm rather open as to what I read. It's weird just at first realizing that you have the choice to believe or reject what you were raised with... and be grown up enough to see for yourself what that "truth" is based upon and decide
As gumby said, the biggest trouble with all this is that to learn more about Jesus and scripture you first have to wade through a load of 'rubbish' and be able to discern between the made up and the factual.
Myx: I have read on this, from many sources, but to me it has seem to be speculation for the most part. Especially when you look at Polycarp, Ignatius, the early church fathers writings. I think the NC is solid at this point.
If you are interested in knowing more about the term HO OHN in EXODUS 3:14 get yourself an Interlinear bible and have a read at Revelation chapter 1 and see what you can find !
Myx: Yeah, I'd love that. I have a concordance I believe at the moment. Vines. And guess what my Aunt informed me with glee that she was getting me for Christmas?! a LEXICON! Oh goody! More STUDY! bah -
15
Existing in the nature of God
by ClassAvenger ini preached to a jw and they used the following verse against me:
phi 2:6
"who existing in the nature of god, did not consider being equal to god something to be held onto," he said that this was one of the texts that disproved the trinity because it does not state that he was god, but that he existed in the nature of god: divine.
-
Myxomatosis
If a person would just "inform" themselves about the history behind the NT.......they would understand why the confusion regarding this subject.The trinity will twist your brains in knots. It's much easier to find the "source" of the problem..............that being those who fabricated and twisted the story of any life Jesus might have had here on earth, and put it into the bible.
Gumby
Myx: Hey Gumby!
isn't it pretty much religion and doctrine that makes a person doubt the existence of God?
I know it has for me...
As for the Trinity? Well, yeah, it's not what you'd expect..that's one of the reasons I believe it.
As for the fabrication of the New Testament. I'm not gonna give a whole lot of information in support of it, cos I don't think you're interested...neither am I frankly.
The thing I've thought about recently is what if He did exist? I mean the Jesus written of in the New covenant? How would I feel about a person that allegedly did and said the things attributed to Him in the NC? Including, as the gospels have it, suffering every pain and dying for every wrong that humankind has done, did or will ever do. Making His suffering on the cross literally unimaginable. If it's true. What would I think of Him?
I'm just drawn to that. I think that I have not seen compelling evidence to the contrary (and I've seen my share) that has not been refuted, that He didn't exist, and until I am convinced by the truth as it be of the matter, I don't think I really want to deny Him.
I think you've been hurt by religion and what you thought was god...and intellectually satisfy that pain by being able to tell yourself and me that it's all bunk. Perhaps your right. *am worn down from all the different ideas*
anyways, I really dunno what I think or what to say. I'm tired.
I hope you find peace and joy ...I think you're cool!
cheers Gumby,
Myxomatosis -
15
Existing in the nature of God
by ClassAvenger ini preached to a jw and they used the following verse against me:
phi 2:6
"who existing in the nature of god, did not consider being equal to god something to be held onto," he said that this was one of the texts that disproved the trinity because it does not state that he was god, but that he existed in the nature of god: divine.
-
Myxomatosis
Hi, I just had to address this:
Myx: I wasn't trying to convince anybody. I was answering the way I knew it. I didn't know I was being challenged to a Scriptural dual.
Anyways, I'm only 19 so go easy on me. I've really only learned jack-crap about the Bible for about 8 months.
So I'm gonna make lots of mistakes I'm sure!
I do my best though with what I know so far.
love
Myxomatosis -
15
Existing in the nature of God
by ClassAvenger ini preached to a jw and they used the following verse against me:
phi 2:6
"who existing in the nature of god, did not consider being equal to god something to be held onto," he said that this was one of the texts that disproved the trinity because it does not state that he was god, but that he existed in the nature of god: divine.
-
Myxomatosis
However, if I restrict my comments to your scriptural exegesis then I would say it is CRAP.
Myx: LOL! Thank you! But really, If I'm wrong I'm wrong. It's no problem for me. It's the way I've learned it, I suppose, and if it's incorrect, *shrugs* then I will promptly correct my error!
I think you already pretty much knew the answer before you asked me though! as you did a fantastic job on your part.
You quoting of John 8.58 and adding an INTERPOLATION of ho ohn into the text is - frankly shocking !
Myx: Oh, come come! Really, it's how I've seen it addressed before. I don't particularly know what difference ho ohn makes, but I think it completes the meaning a bit. Or something.
It shows a scant disregard for TRUTH.
Myx: Wow, you sound like a Jehovah's Witness! Don't get to bristly about this! I tried to answer your question without being deceptive or dishonest to the best of my ability! I'm dreadfully sorry you think I disrespect truth.
anyways, thank you for your educated reply, do you still hold to the Bible, because you seem defensive about my apparent filthy use of it..
Dean: So , I think your assertion that Jesus called himself ego eimi ho ohn is wholly untenable and is not warranted by holy scripture.
Myx: well, I hereby retract it.... except this forum doesn't work for me, I can't figure out how to edit, so my shocking misrepresentation of the truth is still on display to mislead all the people who frankly, couldn't care less one way or the other...
cheers then,
Myxomatosis