Great idea to spread the link.
I did know of TED videos - they are wonderful talks by experts at the cutting edge of their fields just telling you in an easy conversational style something very very interesting about the world we live in.
Worth bookmarking as a favourite and browsing when you have 20 minutes to spare.
Should we tolerate the intolerant?
Surely tolerance is not a permanent state but one of tentative judgement awaiting action. We tolerate certain people or activities pending our observation to see if they they turn out good or redeem themselves in some way. If they don't we then no longer tolerate them or the activity: we condemn it and/or apply some sanction to stop the behaviour.
Tolerance is about having the grace and kindness to give someone or something a chance. It is not about having to endure unacceptable behaviour or activities.
This is an interesting thread, and made me think.
How I think it works....
The Government gives our money to the banks to bail them out. It's not a loan (because they can't pay it back) so the Government takes ownership of the bank, or most of it. We now own the bank.
But the Government needs to get "our" money back so later it sells the part of the bank it owns to anyone who wants to buy the shares and takes the money and pays it back into the Treasury where it originally was paid out from. We don't pay twice because only those who want to own the shares will buy them, and hopefully, at a price the Government makes a profit.
It sounds straightforward, (but have I missed something?)
Oops, started a new thread in error. I will repost in proper place.
How I think it works....
The Government gives our money to the banks to bail them out. It's not a loan (because they can't pay it back) so the Government takes ownership of the bank, or most of it. We now own the bank.
But the Government needs to get "our" money back so later it sells the part of the bank it owns to anyone who wants to buy the shares and takes the money and pays it back into the Treasury where it originally was paid out from. We don't pay twice because only those who want to own the shares will buy them, and hopefully, at a price the Government makes a profit.
It sounds straightforward, (but have I missed something?)
I voted no, but in fact history will be even more harsh in its judgement than we are now.
Why? Because we know he lied and can see the terrible result of that, but only the future will know how long the Allies will have had to stay in Iraq to bring it back to some semblance of order (if ever) and the full toll of human and financial damage that an Ego on legs can bring about.
Whether or not climate change is ultimately real, or not, it is interesting to see so many apparently opposing groups side up with the global warming scam because it suits their own financial agenda.
Furthermore, I think carbon trading will be seen as one of the great financial scams of the 21century if allowed to take off as planned. Already the EU pays billions for carbon offset credits to countries such as China. Do we really believe that a place like China which shoots its own people, stamps violently on political dissent is going to be honest about providing real offset activities - who will check? It's more likely the money is being spent on a new carrier fleet to threaten Taiwan sometime in the future. Who is going to protect them - certainly not the U.S. anymore who are in hock to the Chinese.
Just my 2 pence.
Jim
Hi everyone,
I have been around, now and again, for a while as a lurker only as I was in a relationship so it was not appropriate to participate.
That situation has changed now and separated from my former partner so I'm looking to meet ladies looking for fun, and perhaps something more. I hope to join in the general chatter and make friends in what has always seemed a very lively and friendly site. Send me a line if my profile interests you (photo to follow).
Take care
Jim
