France shows its true colors (no, not a white flag)

[yeat182]

Here is an interview that gives some insight as to why france won't stand up to Iraq.... (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,81079,00.html)

[Alex Djaferis]

thast insteresting and i do not say its not true..., however, its still an American point of view so it likely may be slightly biast. but who knows.

[your moms hot]

"Marc Ginsberg, former U.S. ambassador to Morocco,"

last time i checked...morocco wasnt anything like france or iraq...so..why should i believe a guy whose only knowledge of expertise (as far as i know) is on a small islamic country in northwestern africa??

another quote:
"HUME: Now France, of course, is -- I've heard the relationship with France and Saudi -- France and Iraq likened to the U.S. relationship with Saudi Arabia. Is that a fair comparison?"

very fair comparison...what ginsberg DIDNT say was that american oil interests are vested in saudi arabia...and even though saudi arabia has killed and tortured its own citizens...we arent even considering war with them...in fact..theyre our biggest arab allies in the region...

[yeat182]

Originally posted by your moms hot
"Marc Ginsberg, former U.S. ambassador to Morocco,"

last time i checked...morocco wasnt anything like france or iraq...so..why should i believe a guy whose only knowledge of expertise (as far as i know) is on a small islamic country in northwestern africa??

another quote:
"HUME: Now France, of course, is -- I've heard the relationship with France and Saudi -- France and Iraq likened to the U.S. relationship with Saudi Arabia. Is that a fair comparison?"

very fair comparison...what ginsberg DIDNT say was that american oil interests are vested in saudi arabia...and even though saudi arabia has killed and tortured its own citizens...we arent even considering war with them...in fact..theyre our biggest arab allies in the region...

i would agree that the suadi's are probably no good, and we are allied with them. but i think in the years since the last gulf war Kuwait is probably our biggest ally in the region now, they are extremely grateful to the US for freeing them. the saudi's definatly have some questions to answer for, especially how 9 of the 9/11 hijackers were saudi's. i think that once the situation in Iraq is resolved, the US will back off its relationship with the Saudi's unless they clean up their act. at least i hope so.

[Alex Djaferis]

Originally posted by yeat182
i would agree that the suadi's are probably no good, and we are allied with them. but i think in the years since the last gulf war Kuwait is probably our biggest ally in the region now, they are extremely grateful to the US for freeing them. the saudi's definatly have some questions to answer for, especially how 9 of the 9/11 hijackers were saudi's. i think that once the situation in Iraq is resolved, the US will back off its relationship with the Saudi's unless they clean up their act. at least i hope so.

I doubt they will back off. Why should they? they are in the nice situation there. Free use of Bases (which is crazy to obtain from a country like Saudi), they get oil from them, they are close to all the countries that are possible trouble for the USA (yemen, Oman) meaning they can overlook what is happening better. they are closer to Israel incase they need help.

[yeat182]

well, you have to figure that Iraq would replace them as a source for military bases and such, probably as a source of oil as well. i'm not saying that will happen for sure, i just think it would be a good idea on the part of our government.

[WithStamin]

Wouldn't that be interesting if France actually sent in troops to back up Iraq? It wouldn't happen, but what do you think we would do if they did?

[evil zach]

You (The US) wouldn't have to do anything. You already showed them whos boss with "freedom fries"

[BrandNewRock05]

Originally posted by evil zach
You (The US) wouldn't have to do anything. You already showed them whos boss with "freedom fries"
i hated freedom fries

[evil zach]

i know you do, i was just in a sarcastic state of mind

[WithStamin]

Originally posted by BrandNewRock05
i hated freedom fries Yeah, they're dumb. What do fries have to do with freedom? If anything fried must be French. They're bad to have around (they make you unhealthy). They have no real nutritional value.

[yeat182]

Originally posted by evil zach
You (The US) wouldn't have to do anything. You already showed them whos boss with "freedom fries"

hahaha! that was good....props.

[Alex Djaferis]

I swear us people in Europe are having a blast laughing our asses off about the "freedom fries" bullshit. hahahaha. its so great for us.

[Justin_stacy]

Originally posted by PeeDster
I swear us people in Europe are having a blast laughing our asses off about the "freedom fries" bullshit. hahahaha. its so great for us.

Us people over hear are laughing our asses off at your guys tax rates, gas prices, unemployement rates (no wonder you have so much time to go march in the streets), and lack of power in the world. It just brings tears to my eyes.

[Alex Djaferis]

Originally posted by Justin_stacy
Us people over hear are laughing our asses off at your guys tax rates, gas prices, unemployement rates (no wonder you have so much time to go march in the streets), and lack of power in the world. It just brings tears to my eyes.

true true, but we have higher salaries so in the end it evens out with things like that.

[WithStamin]

If you have higher salaries, why is you GDP $10,000 less than ours?

[Justin_stacy]

Originally posted by PeeDster
true true, but we have higher salaries so in the end it evens out with things like that.

Higher salaries only help those with jobs, and your salaries are only a little higher, maybe a few thousand $ a year more, but how much higher are your taxes probably 20% to 30% higher, so i dont think it balances out.

[Justin_stacy]

Originally posted by WithStamin
If you have higher salaries, why is you GDP $10,000 less than ours?

its only about two thousand different, but thats becasue different countries use different ways of figureing it out.

[WithStamin]

Originally posted by Justin_stacy
its only about two thousand different, but thats becasue different countries use different ways of figureing it out.
United States: GDP - per capita: purchasing power parity - $36,300 (2001 est.)
France: GDP - per capita: purchasing power parity - $25,700 (2002 est.)

Source: CIA.gov

Looks like more than $2000 to me. Plus you pay huge amounts of taxes to pay for poor people's entertainment. The government acutally pays for poor kid's ski trips in France (or so my French teacher says).

[Justin_stacy]

Originally posted by WithStamin
United States: GDP - per capita: purchasing power parity - $36,300 (2001 est.)
France: GDP - per capita: purchasing power parity - $25,700 (2002 est.)

Source: CIA.gov

Looks like more than $2000 to me. Plus you pay huge amounts of taxes to pay for poor people's entertainment. The government acutally pays for poor kid's ski trips in France (or so my French teacher says).

Well im not going to get in a fight with ya on this one, but the site i found when i typed the 2,000$, showed swiss at about 33,000$ and us at around 35,000$. But it doesn't matter.

[WithStamin]

France's GDP is so low because there's no point in working there. You can either have to work and have a mediocre job, or you can not work and get the same thing. Let's think about that one for a minute... I think I'll not work! That's how socialism/communism works, folks.

[evil zach]

"He who can work and dosn't shall not eat"
Thats how socialsim works

[WithStamin]

Originally posted by evil zach
"He who can work and dosn't shall not eat"
Thats how socialsim works So who determines who can't and can work? It just as simple as this: if you don't work, you get rewarded for it (free money).

[Justin_stacy]

Originally posted by evil zach
"He who can work and dosn't shall not eat"
Thats how socialsim works

Not in Europe buddy, they have a hole class of people that leave off welfare, and have been doing it there whole life, and unlike america theres no set timelimit.

[evil zach]

Then they arn't true socialism. Socialim/Communism are based on the teachings of the communist manifest which can be read here (http://www.anu.edu.au/polsci/marx/classics/manifesto.html)
People who abuse welfare sytems get no sympathy from me. They are exploiting the generosity of strangers. This is no diferent then workers be exploited by employers.

[your moms hot]

Originally posted by yeat182
. the saudi's definatly have some questions to answer for, especially how 9 of the 9/11 hijackers were saudi's.
so? saudis hate americans. what does that have to do with the saudi government. if you can show me concerete proof that the saudi government was directly involved in the 911 attacks. maybe ill consider your arguemnt. but the fact that most of the hijackers tells us one of two things:
a) theres strong anti american sentiment in saudi arabia
b) terrorist cells enjoy recruting from saudi arabia

[yeat182]

Originally posted by WithStamin
United States: GDP - per capita: purchasing power parity - $36,300 (2001 est.)
France: GDP - per capita: purchasing power parity - $25,700 (2002 est.)

Source: CIA.gov

Looks like more than $2000 to me. Plus you pay huge amounts of taxes to pay for poor people's entertainment. The government acutally pays for poor kid's ski trips in France (or so my French teacher says).

Peedster is from Switzerland isn't he?

[WithStamin]

Originally posted by yeat182
Peedster is from Switzerland isn't he? Yeah. We were still talking about France, right? If not, here's the numbers from Switzerland. I can honestly say that I know nothing about their political system, so I'll refrain from comment.

Switzerland: GDP - per capita: purchasing power parity - $31,100 (2001 est.)

[yeat182]

yeah, i was just confused about who was talking about what...oh well.

[evil zach]

Originally posted by WithStamin
So who determines who can't and can work? It just as simple as this: if you don't work, you get rewarded for it (free money).
The disabled can't work. The feeble can't work. Young children can't work. It's not exactly rocket science.

[yeat182]

but i think the question is, who's in charge? who decides who eats and who works? and if someone is in charge, isn't that a corruption of socialism?

[evil zach]

In socialim, no, in communism yes. It's kinda complicated but I'll do my best to explain it. Communism is a prosses with many phases. The end result is similar to anarchy, but anarchist and communist differ on issues regarding property and possesion. The first stage in communism would be a democratic socialism. This is when the class structure whould begin to be destroyed. This would be done by having everybody make more or less the same amount of money in relation to how long they work. People would still have authority over another to tell them when to work and what work to do, etc. The end result is communism or the "utopia" this is when government would be disolved, and nobody would have authority over eachother. By this point people would work because they want to so they can benifet the community. They would have specific roles to fill, depending on what they are best suited for. This would be most likly determined by the community. So in a socialism somvody being in charge dosn't contradict socialist priciples, but in a communism, yes it dose.

[WithStamin]

This is when the class structure whould begin to be destroyed. This would be done by having everybody make more or less the same amount of money in relation to how long they work. I don't see how that could work. There would be no incentive for working hard as opposed to slacking. There would be no reason to get a good education. People would just get the easiest job they could, regardless of how useful of productive it is.

[yeat182]

Originally posted by evil zach
In socialim, no, in communism yes. It's kinda complicated but I'll do my best to explain it. Communism is a prosses with many phases. The end result is similar to anarchy, but anarchist and communist differ on issues regarding property and possesion. The first stage in communism would be a democratic socialism. This is when the class structure whould begin to be destroyed. This would be done by having everybody make more or less the same amount of money in relation to how long they work. People would still have authority over another to tell them when to work and what work to do, etc. The end result is communism or the "utopia" this is when government would be disolved, and nobody would have authority over eachother. By this point people would work because they want to so they can benifet the community. They would have specific roles to fill, depending on what they are best suited for. This would be most likly determined by the community. So in a socialism somvody being in charge dosn't contradict socialist priciples, but in a communism, yes it dose.


yeah, that makes sense now, i studied Marx and his manfesto and some of the "Utopia" ideas a couple years ago in my philosophy class, but thanks for clearing it up.

but also, i know that i am a slacker and thus, i would be responsible for the downfall of any Utopia. sorry guys.

[Alex Djaferis]

Originally posted by WithStamin
If you have higher salaries, why is you GDP $10,000 less than ours?

First of all I don't live in France, but anyway, you aren't looking at GDP per capita. Of course if you have more people you can have a higher GDP...atleast we take care of our poor...(well, better then you guys anyway)

[WithStamin]

Originally posted by PeeDster
First of all I don't live in France, but anyway, you aren't looking at GDP per capita. Of course if you have more people you can have a higher GDP...atleast we take care of our poor...(well, better then you guys anyway)
First: Yes, I am looking at GDP per capita. I copied the text right out of CIA.gov. Look if you want. Here's France (http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/fr.html#Econ) and here's the United States (http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/us.html#Econ) Our GDP per capita is around $11,000 higher than France's.

As far as taking care of our poor, I'll give you big "so what?". In America, you get more or less what you work for. Isn't that the fairest way to do things? We do have many (too many) social programs to give money to those who don't have jobs, and they can live off that for some amount of time. Unlike France, where people just live off the hard work of the rich for their entire lives.

[yeat182]

Originally posted by WithStamin
First: Yes, I am looking at GDP per capita. I copied the text right out of CIA.gov. Look if you want. Here's France (http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/fr.html#Econ) and here's the United States (http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/us.html#Econ) Our GDP per capita is around $11,000 higher than France's.

As far as taking care of our poor, I'll give you big "so what?". In America, you get more or less what you work for. Isn't that the fairest way to do things? We do have many (too many) social programs to give money to those who don't have jobs, and they can live off that for some amount of time. Unlike France, where people just live off the hard work of the rich for their entire lives.

yes, but he isn't from france...