Asked and Answered: Cerebrus

[Mr Memory]

Cer-- to quoue you:

"Like I said I am not a historian."

Ain't it the truth!

[heath]

Cerebrus,

I agree - the Barry Sanders attitude is preferable and mindless gloating and chest-pounding seem silly in retrospect.

We should all act based on our intellect, not emotion. What you are seeing and what I am guilty of is/was an emotional response.

[cerberus]

Mr. Memory,

I just love those one-liners. Usually statements like that only come from people who are defensive, because they know so well their limitations.

Forgive me for admitting that I am not a historian. But I am a gambler, and I'd bet my life that your level of intelligence would underwhelm my dog.

I usually refrain from childish banter, but I apologize for my momentary lapse in judgement.

[Lionking]

Since moving to a different site for my Nascar picks, I haven't been back to visit MajorWager for quite some time, but I'm finding these discussions interesting and thought I'd throw my two cents in.

Before I start, let me warn everybody that I have an economics background and am currently a student working on my MBA, so I'm gonna take a bit more of a scholarly approach to this. On the point of why the U.S. is the greatest country in the world, on this point I have to agree with Heath. The United States has earned their powerful position in the world because over 200 years ago our forefathers implemented a system of government that through the sound economic principles allowed its citizens to determine their own destinies, make their own decisions, and most importantly, gave all its citizens the motivation to act in their own self interests. The market economy, by definition, creates wealth, and the implication that our conquest or exploitation of others (I can only assume that meant our treatment of native americans, as terrible as that was) is the way we earned this is purely false.

When you mention the richest getting richer and the poor getting poorer as a problem in our country, I would submit that that's totally ridiculous. Let me ask a question that when you first read it will seem ridiculous, but if you REALLY think about it you may see the point. The question is this - who has done more good for society as a whole - Bill Gates or Mother Theresa???

99% of people immediately say Mother Theresa, but dig deeper. Bill Gates (and I'm not even talking about all his charitable ventures here) has put food on the tables of all the thousands of his employees, made technological advances that bettered his society, and created enormous wealth for investors through the appreciation of Microsoft stock. In fact, you can make the case that Gates' charitable efforts lessen the good that he does for society, since a man of his talent could probably invest that money (instead of giving it away) and create more wealth, putting more food on more families' tables and allowing people to purchase computers for their own schools and the like.

Mother Theresa visited towns in impoverished areas and gave them some food.

The rich in our society are the ones responsible for putting food on our citizens' plates, many times allowing them to acquire personal fortunes in the process. The poor in our country, through our system of government, are free to act in their self interests. When they determine that collecting a welfare check instead of getting a job is in their self interest, so be it. When they decide that they need that next high from their drug addiction rather than going clean, they are acting as to what they think at the time is their self-interest.

I personally have no problem with someone like Bill Gates being a billionaire 30 times over. Suppose we took that right away from him; he would then have no motivation for innovating new products, which would mean he would have no motivation for starting Microsoft, which in turn all the wealth created for others and the technological advances he brought would never had happened.

I don't mean to sound like Gordon Gekko, but greed works. And the richest 1% in our country are the ones most responsible for its success. The fact that the rich can become richer is the number one factor that contributed to the ascendency of America, since all these economic principles that make us so successful would go out the window if they weren't. There are many other countries in the world utilizing free markets, but as Heath said the US had a head start and has perfected it. The wealth created has allowed us to build the most powerful military in the world, the best infrastructure in the world, and made us the envy of the world.

To assume that our ill-treatment of others is the way we got here is absolutely ridiculous. Stalin, Hitler, Caesar, Napoleon, whoever you want to name as the most common examples of "conquerers" did not create sustained wealth. So for you to assume that conquering of others is the driving factor in the creation of wealth is flat out wrong...

Having said that, I share SOME of your concerns on how bad the retaliation of the U.S. is going to be. However, we didn't want this, and as Bush and others have said it was an act of war. When at war, the first priority has to be winning the war, and things like collateral damage become secondary. Remember, we've been bombing these people on and off for years, and limiting collateral damamge to civilians was always a huge factor in the formulating of our strategies for attack. In a war, your enemies are trying to destroy you, so you have no choice but to try to destroy them. Our enemy has introduced the terms in which this war will be fought, not us, so I would have no problms if we play the game according to the rules they laid out for us...

[Lionking]

And by the way, I find it interesting that you mention that how you treat your fellow citizens of the world is such an important part of making a country great. Just you saying how Canada has a military budget of virtually zero because you know the US will fight your fights for you speaks volumes as to how we would help out a friend in need, while at the same time your country is essentially lining its own pockets by NOT spending money on its own defense because of your dependence on us. Like that article posted in another thread (written by a Canadian years ago), anytime anything bad happens to anyone in the world, it always seems to be the U.S. taking the lead to help. It can be argued that there has never been a more compassionate, caring people in the world that the U.S.

So in the future, instead of coming on here complaining about how you're getting sick about Americans flaunting their patriotism, I would come on here and thank your lucky stars that you have THE GREATEST COUNTRY IN THE WORLD as a friendly neighbor. Just in the same way I give thanks that I was fortunate enough to be born here...

[Mr Memory]

Cer--

Both my SAT's and my IQ are in the top 1%
of all tested, pally. It's regrettable that what
so-called education you may have received prevents
you from recognizing certain larger,
prevailing realities. I won't waste
my time laying out what would evidently be
a badly-needed stateside history lesson, for
the likes of you. Good luck in your life
-- you're going to need it. And heaven
help you if these creeps visit Toronto --
though the way you talk, you might actually go out of your way to greet them with
open arms.

[Mr Memory]

Well-done, Lionking.

[cerberus]

Lionking,

Who did more good for society as a whole, Bill Gates or Mother Theresa?

I don't think that the answer is as cut and dry as you would like me to believe.

Sure, in a capitalist society, Bill Gates has done quite well for himself. But you state that you would have no problem, "if Bill Gates was a billionaire 30 times over because if that right was taken away from him, he would then have no motivation for creating new products."

Are you saying that the dream of untold riches should be, and is the only motivating factor for someone to prosper?

You also say that, "the rich in our society are the ones responsible for putting food on our citizens' plates, many times allowing them to acquire personal fortunes in the process. The poor in our country, through our system of government, are free to act in their self interests. When they determine that collecting a welfare check instead of getting a job is in their self interest, so be it. When they decide that they need that next high from their drug addiction rather than going clean, they are acting as to what they think at the time is their self-interest. I don't mean to sound like Gordon Gekko, but greed works. And the richest 1% in our country are the ones most responsible for its success.

Does greed really work? I always thought that greed was a personality flaw, and sorry, I still do.

Greed can make a person, even a country, morally bankrupt. There are many terrible diseases that there are no known cures for. Imagine that a scientist discovers a cure for aids. If this scientist believes that greed works, then why shouldn't he charge, let's say, $100,000 a customer to rid him or her of this terrible ailment? Why shouldn't he? We have actors, actresses, athletes, and other professions who do much more trivial work, and they make preposterous amounts of money. Imagine the backlash that this scientist would feel. The accusations of greed on his part would be unending. So he would yield to being "ungreedy", and isn't that a step backwards in the name of capitalism. In fact, it would be a huge step backwards because this scientist would then have no motivation to try to find the cure for cancer or any other disease.

"And the richest 1% in our country are the ones most responsible for its success... The wealth created has allowed us to build the most powerful military in the world, the best infrastructure in the world, and made us the envy in the world."

Sure, the rich are the ones that provide the military machinery, but it's the poor that wage the wars.

The overemphasis on wealth, which in turn often leads to greed is a bigger problem in society than you think.

Who are the role models for the majority of people in this society. Athletes, actors, actresses, singers. Why? We all know. Because they are rich, filthy rich. Maybe we should be looking up to our parents, teachers, doctors, or anybody else that makes a much more positive and tangible effect on our lives.

Perhaps this is where someone like Mother Teresa comes in, reminding us that there is more, much more to life than the pursuit of the all-consuming American dream.


Canadians would appreciate help from the USA, but not be dependant upon the USA should we be attacked. Perhaps our meek military only mirrors the fact that we have few enemies in this world. Be proud of your enormous firepower, but have you ever stopped to think why it NEEDS to be so big?

Like some posters have mentioned, perhaps you need to understand the enemy, and why such hatred could be directed towards the USA. But the ongoing mentality here is to just bomb the crap out of all those known terrorist countries. If you think that this is going to eradicate terrorism, then you are fooling yourself. This would only spawn more terrorism, whether you want to believe it or not.

[The Major]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:[/size]<HR>And heaven
help you if these creeps visit Toronto --
though the way you talk, you might actually go out of your way to greet them with
open arms.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Mr Memory. I very much enjoy reading your posts but comments such as these are exactly what not to say, IMO.

Heath and Cel are making points that are starting to be made now by the media. After the horror itself subsides reasonable thinking people will prevail. (Whoever that may be).

For Heath to suggest we try and look at the root of the evil and answer the questions as to why is a completely reasonable thing to do. In fact Fox News was the first to have a 15-minute peace titled "Why the Hatred". How in heavens name can anyone solve any problem without first identifying the problem?

I happen to think that the problem does not lie within the US. That is like saying Nicole was the problem in the OJ situation. Ridiculous.

I believe many Islam’s and Arabs think the only thing stopping them from being the world superpower is the USA. I further believe that envy is the root of all evils and I think these dictators and radical religious fanatics are envious to extremes against the USA. In fact, to the point where they will do anything to prove themselves "greater" (using their own mutated definition of greatness.)

These leaders must be eliminated (murdered, killed whatever). Nations who have governments that support terrorism must be destroyed (governments that is, until a cleaner more tolerant regime surfaces) This will take years and years to accomplish but it must be done for no other reason than to make sure our children’s children never have to watch the horror that we all experienced on Tuesday. We are no longer virgins in this new world of terror. Let us not ever allow this to happen to the children of America. It is our duty to eradicate terrorism from the face of the earth no matter the cost.

The Major

[Lionking]

Yes, I agree that greed CAN make a country morally bankrupt. But from what I've seen, you've offered no evidence that this is the case with the U.S.

You've been offered examples on these boards of the U.S. offering aid abroad when people in other countries suffer from earthquakes, the ravages of war (due to our participation or not), and other catastrophies, which by the way, I don't see Canada running around the globe helping their fellow man half as much as us. Your argument on pop culture in the US and how we view people as rich being heroes is ridiculous. All we've seen on TV lately are stories of the true heroes of the WTC disaster who helped their fellow man, THEY are our heroes. I might also add that these TV stories and shows of patriotism are the very thing that you came on here criticizing, so you really can't have it both ways.

That guy who ran the debt brokerage on the 100th floor of the world trade center who lost 700 of his employees, is HE morally bankrupt??? He's certainly rich running a company that trades $5 trillion in bond issues each year, but I also see a heck of a lot of compassion and caring for his employees also. He will be financially supporting all 700 of those families from the future profits of his business, and I certainly wouldn't call that morally bankrupt. Just because a country creates wealth doesn't mean our morals are at all out of line, and when you talked that maybe we should rethink why we are such a target I would say (and I think just about everyone on here would agree with me) that I resent the implication that we had this coming...

Saudi Arabia asked us to station troops in their country to protect them from Iraq, and because of America's compassion for our fellow countries of the world we offer to help, and this is the primary reason that Osama Bin Laden is pissed at us. Iraq invades Kuwait, and because of America's moral compassion we go to aid a country in need, and this pisses off the Arab world. So based on your way of thinking, the way I see it, is that from now on the U.S. should be far LESS compassionate, let these Arabs fight their own wars and let the chips fall where they may.

I think you should rethink your views on this one, because to tell you the truth I agree with others on the board that you are talking out of your ass, and have no idea of the benefits of capitalism or the moral fiber of our country. Go wave your Canadian flag and stop polluting these boards...

[MarkDel]

LionKing,

You have made a couple of really, really good posts in this thread. Well done.

[skoda]

This is definetly a deep debate with informed and detailed posts. I always say KISS-IT / Keep it short & sweet...

Our Love is Stronger than their Hate!

IMO; Money isn't everything it is the only thing! Bin Laden is very very wealthy, why does he not share.
Or does he? It seems he uses his fortunes for himself and justs wants to make himself bigger and more powerful... Like I said this is a deep debate but I read a thought by someone asking about finding out why Tuesday happened and what the motives of those involved were before reacting. Very good Idea.....

Also think it is very interesting that the media is not discussing
our Foreign Policy? Huh... Lastly this could change how our children are educated but all that matters now that war has been WAGEd against us is winning! Just like when we make a WAGEr. Just Win!

Our Love is Stronger than their Hate!

[cerberus]

Lionking,

Greed does not work. You think it does. I simply implied that it could make a country morally bankrupt, to which you agreed. When did I say that the USA was morally bankrupt? I pointed out some of the many problems, with the capitalist system, not that any system is without its faults, that's all.

You said that the acquisition of wealth is what motivates people. Perhaps that is the basic idea behind capitalism, but I simply said it should not be.

There is an OVEREMPHASIS on the importance of wealth in society. America is guilty of it, Canada is, and so are many other societies. I won't waste my time trying to explain that our role models should not be actors, athletes, entertainers, etc..., but instead our parents, teachers, friends, or any other person who has made a much more tangible positive influence in our lives. People prefer to idolize wealth, power, and fame. I find that sad.

So when you say that Bill Gates has done more good for a society as a whole than Mother Theresa, I simply choose to disagree. If I could have had the pleasure to sit down and talk with either one of them, I would have rather talked to Mother Theresa.

I was simply countering your arguments. If you want to twist what I said, and try to make my statements appear anti-American or whatever, I could care less.

You said greed was good because the acquisiton of wealth is what should motivate people. You raved about the greatness of capitalism. I thought I was merely stating some of the negative aspects of capitalism. I didn't even think this discussion had anything to do with the bombings that took place, but for some reason, you, and other people here hold a grudge against me that I cannot shake.

You talked about how Iraq invaded Kuwait, and "based on my way of thinking, the way I see it, is that from now on the U.S. should be far less compassionate, let these Arabs fight their own wars and let the chips fall where they may." Perhaps the USA should let these countries wage their own wars, and if they had, perhaps much of this hatred towards the USA would never had existed. The price the USA paid was the loss of countless lives on Sept. 11, and many others before that. Of course, now people will say that I think that the USA had it coming. I, like Heath, prefer to look at the whole picture. If I was American, and I lost a son in one of their humanitary missions, or the most recent bombings, I would question whether all this helping of other countries was worth the loss of our own innocent lives. What is wrong with that? But, I'll let him be your whipping boy from now on.

I'm happy and proud to be Canadian, just as you should be happy to be American. I think we have a great country here in Canada. Whether it is the greatest is of little importance to me, I would just like to see my country be the best that it can be. So, I was never attacking American patriotism, I was asking what I thought was a simple, and unoffending question as to why some Americans had to always re-affirm that America was the greatest or most powerful country in the world.

I'll stop wasting my time and yours. No need to walk me out the door. It was a pleasure.

[count zero]

We offer to help Kuwait because of our compassion for the other countries of the world? Please. We helped Kuwait because of our compassion for cheap oil, period.

Think cerberus is taking a lot of jingoistic BS that worthy folks shouldn't be throwing. Every country thinks they're the greatest, and the idea that greatness is something that can be measured by might or wealth belongs to the distant past. I still remember what Canada did for us during the hostage crisis, and I'd be proud to be a Canadian.

As for the guy who compared Bill Gates to Mother Teresa, that is possibly the most ridiculous single statement I've ever seen on the internet. There's a little concept called sacrifice...

[cerberus]

I know I said I was leaving, but I just had to say this.

Lionking,

There is a big headline on page A21 of the Toronto Star newspaper here in Ontario, Canada. It says that, "Darkness haunted Mother Teresa."

The artical states that Mother Teresa sometimes questioned the existence of God. She sometimes felt rejected by God, helpless and tempted to abandon her work caring for the poor or dying, according to her letters and diaries published by an Indian theological journal.

Mother Teresa was not a religious zealot who only served the poor because she knew she'd have a greater reward in heaven. I'll be the first to admit that I never knew much about Mother Teresa, but I wish I did.

To me her doubts on the existence of God, made her acts even more selfless than they already were. As count zero so bravely pointed out, that America helped Kuwait not only for compassionate reasons, but also for cheap oil, Mother Teresa helped others not just for rewards.

So you keep thinking that the world needs more people like Bill Gates, but I'll prefer to value the contributions of Mother Theresa.

I guess I'm talking out of my ass, right?
You keep worshipping wealth and power, that's your choice, and sadly, the choice of far too many people.


MrkDel,

I think you're an idiot, and I'm sure the feeling is mutual. Let's just leave it at that.

Or do you want to threaten me again, like the tough guy you think you are? I remain rather unimpressed. Keep cussing out posters on this forum that you disagree with.

Get rid of that chip on your shoulder. What's that? How did I know. You dare me to know that chip off. Enough said.

[MarkDel]

Cerberus,

My comment here was directed at Lionking and was merely...

"LionKing,

You have made a couple of really, really good posts in this thread. Well done."

I have been trying very hard to avoid the ugly confrontations that took place 2-3 days ago on this forum. I will NOT indulge you or anyone else here with that type of rhetoric any further. There will be no more name calling, etc...from me.

As for talk of threats, tough guys, etc...if you feel the need to pursue this line of discussion, please feel free to call me and make whatever arrangements you feel necessary. I will be happy to accomodate you at whatever venue and in whatever manner you feel comfortable, but as we both know, guys like you never show up for such meetings...

[cerberus]

MrkDel,

You are the one who started the name-calling and threats. That's not the way I operate.

Whether we agree or disagree, a little civility would be nice.

I bear no grudges. I would even sign up at your sportsbook, and have thought about doing so in the past.

I enjoy discussing topics, ideas, and sharing thoughts with others, but no matter how angry I feel, or how wrong or stupid I think someone's ideas or logic may be, I try to keep my cool. If I lose my cool, and resort to name-calling, at least I can reflect on it later, and know that it was wrong.

Like you said, you have tried to avoid the confrontations from a couple of days ago. So have I. Let's just forget it ever happened.

But for now, I'll keep my opinions to myself. I won't start any new topics, but I will still peruse these forums, and if I see a question directed at me, I will try my best to answer.

[Lionking]

Count Zero,

Do you have ANY idea at all how much of our oil we got from Kuwait before the Gulf War??? Well, if my memory serves, it was about 3%. If you think our sole purpose in sending 500,000 troops halfway around the world into a war only because of 3% of our oil you're a pretty cynical guy...

Also, let me back up on the Mother Theresa / Bill Gates thing. My question was who had a bigger positive effect on the world. This does NOT take into account one's motives, or whether they struggled with their belief in God, or how much sacrifice they had to endure. To argue that the thousands of people Mother Theresa fed had as wide-reaching an impact as the food put on plates by Bill Gates is pure math. How many employees' mouths does Bill Gates feed??? How many not-very-well-off people decided to buy a few shares of Microsoft stock, that can now put food in their kids' mouths, move their kids to a better neighborhood or to better schools, take their kids on a trip to Disney World, whatever, because of the extra income Microsoft's stock appreciation afforded them??? Again, I think that your point of view on this in looking at the Gates example is only on how it affected him and his fortune, but as a result of his efforts an AWFUL lot of good has come from it on the public as a whole (and I'm not even getting into the technological benefits of his work at all). And let me repeat - I am NOT saying Bill Gates is a better person than Mother Theresa was, I think we can all agree on that one.

Bill Gates was acting in his self interests, Mother Theresa was not, but that does not weigh into the overall EFFECT of the two, which was what I was pointing out. I think the bulk of our argument comes from you not really understanding the point I was trying to make, and I would say that about Count Zero as well. I know we've kind of reached the point in our little argument here that neither of us will give in, but if you really think about it I at least think you'll realize it's not as cut and dried as you think.

The last thing I would say is that it appears that you're backtracking from what you were saying. If I say one of the reasons that America is a great country is because of our wealth, and you come back and say that wealth causes you to become morally bankrupt, then I can only assume that you were referring to the United States and our morals, since if you weren't there would have been no reason at all for you to say it. Yes, we have problems in this country - every country does - and if it makes you feel better I'll be glad to list them for you as Heath did, although I think that would be an even bigger waste of time than this argument has been. Just remember though, you started this entire discussion with your comments on being sick of the shows of patriotism and the like that were on your TV, so I don't think it's fair for you to act like someone threw you down a flight of stairs when they respond to your comments...

[jlpblade]

for those that don't have a grasp on free market economics (and you know who you are), start by reading Adam Smith and continue on with Freidman, Hayek, and von Mises.

also, read Christopher Hutchins re Mother Theresa

Jeff aka csob (caustic son of a bitch)