Hem, orn, I understand politics as a long grown organic process that
started long before the 4th of July of each year.

On 6 Jul., 20:53, ornamentalmind <[email protected]> wrote:
> gabby, yes, it would appear that the food economy and distribution
> system in India is founded upon something different from, say England,
> Germany or the US. Fact is that it has become about the same. As much
> as India tried to fight GE foods, Monsanto and others got there and
> did their 'work' long before they were able to gain control in the US
> for example.
>
> http://www.foodincmovie.com/
>
> In both cases, the 'who is responsible...' question is now mostly met
> with the same answer.
>
> On Jul 6, 4:00 am, gabbydott <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > True, Lee, but then the political reasons for being poor usually
> > differ from an individual in England and an individual in, let's say,
> > India. Even though the individuals' experience of suffering from
> > hunger might be comparable on the physical level, the question of who
> > is responsible for the present situation and how it can be avoided in
> > the future, must allow for differing answers.
>
> > On 6 Jul., 11:00, "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
> > wrote:
>
> > > You are correct, but I do think that if you can't aford food then you
> > > are poor wherever you reside.
>
> > > On 5 July, 10:34, Don Johnson <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > You are correct Vam.  Our poor, and by that I mean those in North
> > > > America(I think a family of four making less then 24,000/yr) aren't
> > > > really poor by international standards.  I was talking about the poor
> > > > I know.  Ironically, as we move toward socialism, they will become
> > > > more dependent and poorer then ever.  The pot bellied, malnourished
> > > > kids from other countries I've little empathy with because, as you
> > > > say, I can't fathom their circumstances. I understand India has a
> > > > serious problem with this.  Despite all the complaining from Chomski
> > > > types, we really don't have much of a problem like that here in the
> > > > States.  Hunger exists, of course, but not near as much here as in
> > > > other places.  We're a fat country in more ways then one.
>
> > > > dj
>
> > > > On Sun, Jul 5, 2009 at 3:24 AM, Vamadevananda<[email protected]> 
> > > > wrote:
>

> > > > > " I understand the hardships of poor people."
>
> > > > > You do, Don, if you say so. But our understanding of the poor, of
> > > > > poverty as existential phenomena played out in the human mind,
> > > > > definitely takes us back to the purest in Marx' thought :  that, it
> > > > > qualifies, shapes and determines, the human mind, in ways and manner
> > > > > that one who is not ( poor ) will find very very difficult, if not
> > > > > impossible, to understand and appreciate.
>
> > > > > Such understanding usually causes us to lose our propensity to judge
> > > > > the ( poor ) others, for one, and to pronounce a lot empathetically on
> > > > > Government welfare programmestargeted at thhe poor in our society, for
> > > > > another.
>
> > > > > On Jul 5, 5:16 am, Don Johnson <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > >> I tend to be flippant at times.  I wasn't, of course, referring to 
> > > > >> any
> > > > >> specific persons in my 'loser parents' remarks.  I understand the
> > > > >> hardships of poor people.  Much of my family is from rural Alabama 
> > > > >> and
> > > > >> are 'poor.'  Nobody is starving over there.  These are country people
> > > > >> and they work hard.  They grow their own food, they go to church and
> > > > >> help the old, the sick and the helpless.  Salt of the earth.  When I
> > > > >> visit, I eat like a king; I love southern cooking.  Because of this
> > > > >> self-dependence, the matriarch(my mother's sister) has never been on
> > > > >> welfare.  The same can't be said for some of her grandchildren but
> > > > >> when they visit(a lot) they always have plenty of food.  It's the
> > > > >> basic responsibility of the parent.  Feed and cloth the kids.  If
> > > > >> someone isn't taking care of this then they can't handle the
> > > > >> responsibility and CPS(or the
> > > > >> grandparents/sister/brother/friend/neighbor) must take charge.  I
> > > > >> suppose one can refer to this as 'destroying the family' but I think
> > > > >> what's best for the kids is more important.
>
> > > > >> Sickness can ruin the bank account.  I get it.  I feel compassion for
> > > > >> them.  They did what they had to do.  When the money is gone there 
> > > > >> are
> > > > >> services available to help them.  It takes work and research and
> > > > >> networking but help can be found.  It will be harder now due to the
> > > > >> recession but it can be done.  Tenacity has it's rewards and there's
> > > > >> nothing like a sick kid to galvanize normally apathetic people into
> > > > >> lending a hand.  This is why there is so much fraud involved in the
> > > > >> health care industry.  This is also why it is so hard to get help; 
> > > > >> you
> > > > >> must convince people you're not scamming them.  The burden of proof
> > > > >> lies with you and it's difficult sometimes.  People will say they're
> > > > >> sorry and say no.  You can't accept 'no.'  You keep chugging away
> > > > >> until they give you what you need or steer you to someone who can.
>
> > > > >> The problem with socialized medicine is the overall quality will
> > > > >> suffer.  It will also be harder to get help from benefactors(wealthy
> > > > >> people) because it's their tax money being confiscated to pay for it.
> > > > >> They'll look at you and your problems and feel compassion but send 
> > > > >> you
> > > > >> off to use your 'free' health care.
>
> > > > >> Everything is hunky-dory until somebody gets sick.  It's sad how many
> > > > >> people actually think it's someone else's responsibility to take care
> > > > >> of them or their kids when this happens.  Asking or bgging  for
> > > > >> help(when it involves your kids, dignity goes out the window) is one
> > > > >> thing.  Demanding and expecting is another.  It's contemptible.  We
> > > > >> must get away from this notion that the world owes you a living and
> > > > >> get people to take responsibility for themselves and their families.
> > > > >> More welfare or 'free lunches' are not the answer.
>
> > > > >> dj
>
> > > > >> On Sat, Jul 4, 2009 at 10:43 AM, iam deheretic<[email protected]> 
> > > > >> wrote:
> > > > >> > Do II know the logic is faulty, the problem is it is mre  rue than 
> > > > >> >  I would
> > > > >> > like to amit,, to quote mey sister who is staunchly anti 
> > > > >> > abortion..  "I can
> > > > >> > only support one issue at a tie."

> > > > >>  Peersonally I am for the womans right to chose and I will support 
> > > > >> her no
> > > > >> > matter what her choice is.
>
> > > > >> > As for nogood lloser parents go, I do know parents that have sold 
> > > > >> > everything
> > > > >> > they had to take care of family, and we are talking in excess of
> > > > >> > $2,500,000.oo paying medical bills, ending up getting assistance 
> > > > >> > to keep the
> > > > >> > family alive...  talk about loser parens  ,, they lost everything.
> > > > >> > I think it is called greed.
> > > > >> > Allan
>
> > > > >> > On Sat, Jul 4, 2009 at 10:15 AM, Don Johnson <[email protected]> 
> > > > >> > wrote:
>
> > > > >> >> There is faulty logic here.  You are assuming that if one opposes
> > > > >> >> abortion then one also opposes feeding starving children.  These 
> > > > >> >> are
> > > > >> >> not mutually exclusive ideals.  Far from it in fact.  What I see
> > > > >> >> happening is some conservatives believe people should take
> > > > >> >> responsibility for their children.  Wither that is in the womb or 
> > > > >> >> at
> > > > >> >> home making sure they get enough to eat.  If the kids are coming 
> > > > >> >> to
> > > > >> >> school starving then CPS takes them away from their no good piece 
> > > > >> >> of
> > > > >> >> garbage useless parents.  The kids get fed and get out from under
> > > > >> >> their loser parents.  Everybody wins.
>
> > > > >> >> It would be like me saying since you(example here, keep pantyhose 
> > > > >> >> on)
> > > > >> >> favor abortion then you must want to murder all hungry children.  
> > > > >> >> See,
> > > > >> >> makes no since whatsoever.
>
> > > > >> >> For the record,  I think women should be in control of their own
> > > > >> >> bodies.  I also think they should do it without tax payer money.  
> > > > >> >> So
> > > > >> >> I'm pro-choice, anti-enable.  Lunch at my kids school is a buck 
> > > > >> >> 75.
> > > > >> >> If their parents can't afford that on their welfare checks 
> > > > >> >> something
> > > > >> >> is very, very hinky and CPS should be involved.
>
> > > > >> >> dj
>
> > > > >> >> On Sat, Jul 4, 2009 at 2:16 AM, iam 
> > > > >> >> deheretic<[email protected]> wrote
> >
 > > >> >> > Those that are anti abortion and d't't rant on about the
starving
> > > > >> >> > childr.
>
> > > >> > >> > that is very easy to explain. abortion they can rant about and 
> > > >> > >> > it cost
> > > > >> >> > them
> > > > >> >> > very little, maybe a small donation and a little time,  now 
> > > > >> >> > starving
> > > > >> >> > children on the other hand takes a major commitment and to do 
> > > > >> >> > it would
> > > > >> >> > require a major out lay of cash. as well as a major outlay of 
> > > > >> >> > time.. so
> > > > >> >> > the
> > > > >> >> > out lay of money and time are the major factors in the choice 
> > > > >> >> > of what to
> > > > >> >> > support.
> > > > >> >> > Allan
>
> > > > >> >> > On Fri, Jul 3, 2009 at 8:50 PM, retiredjim34 
> > > > >> >> > <[email protected]>
> > > > >> >> > wrote:
>
> > > > >> >> >> Lee - an interesting thread; thanks for initiating it.
> > > > >> >> >>     Manyave tried toto understand why there is evil in this 
> > > > >> >> >> world,
> > > > >> >> >> How can it be reconciled with an all powerful, all good God. 
> > > > >> >> >> In all
> > > > >> >> >> cases known to me the reasoning looks at the question from 
> > > > >> >> >> afar, much
> > > > >> >> >> as another god might look at it. The answer usually begins by 
> > > > >> >> >> setting
> > > > >> >> >> up a continuum such as murder to injury to no harm, and labels 
> > > > >> >> >> one end
> > > > >> >> >> of the continuum evil. It then struggles with reconciling the
> > > > >> >> >> continuum, or at least an end of it, with an omniscient God.
> > > > >> >> >>     What I proposed as a definition of evil proceeds from 
> > > > >> >> >> within,
> > > > >> >> >> from the effect the evil has on those involved with it. Thus, I
>
> ...
>
> Erfahren Sie mehr »
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
""Minds Eye"" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/Minds-Eye?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to