$3 000 000.oo

[china]

L Gilbert

You first.

Always ; never was a follower .

I'll wait till you demand your $3million from Hu Jintau or someone.

I don't have to demand something that I all ready have .
This is a heavy one L Gilbert.

 

[darkbeaver]

OK DB, then I'd like to know which you think would be most efficient in the following case:

English hegemony: The more English spreads, the more money English-speaking countries make. A fine example of capitalism. A good example of supporters of this are, well, many governments, including the Conservative Party of Canada.

Wealth transfer: We leave the structural inequities in place, but just have the rich countries give more money to the poor countries, only for the money to flow right back to the rich countries for the process to start over again, like shovelling water out of a sinking ship. A fine example of socialism, and the NDP itself is one of tis proponents.

Restructuring: We replace English-language hegemony with universal bilingualism in a common auxiliary language. As a result, wealth stops flowing from poor coutries to rich in the first place, or at lest as far as spending on language education is concerned, thus eliminating, or at least reducing, the need for rich countries to give more money to the poor countries in the first place as the rich countries would then natrually become poorer and the poorer countries richer through a more just free market itself. A fine example of economic structrualism, and a few examples of supporters of this system would be Margareta Handzlick, the Italian Ministry of Education, and the Hungarian Ministry of Education. There is also Graham Steele, MLA for Halifax, but very few like him in Canada. Even the NDP ignores it.

I agree with global systemic restructuring and your language suggestion is a good idea and could yield results relatively quickly after implimentation and it would be relativly inexpensive compared to the results. I also believe that you are genuinely interested in these social improvments but I have to wonder how you expect to effect these changes when for almost two centuries millions have been murdered in the ongoing permanent wars of maintenance by the ruling class of capitalists to ensure that ideas and reform movements just like yours were crushed without mercy a thousand times. A programme like yours is a declaration of war on them and thier privilage Machjo, I think you believe they will see reason and accept one thousand times the necessary as enough. They won't, there is simply never enough to satisfy the disease of greed.
I think you are not yet convinced that labour is the source of all wealth.

 

[captain morgan]

I have to wonder how you expect to effect these changes when for almost two centuries millions have been murdered in the ongoing permanent wars of maintenance by the ruling class of capitalists to ensure that ideas and reform movements just like yours were crushed without mercy a thousand times. A programme like yours is a declaration of war on them and thier privilage

"The ruling class"... How dramatic, but a nice touch none the less.


A question for you. Exactly what happens when we divvy-up all of the cash to the global population.... Does the Earth instantly morph into Utopia? One big community devoid of grief and angst only to be filled with goodwill and bliss?

 

[Machjo]

I agree that labour is the source of all wealth. But the next question is, how to ensure that wealth is shared fairly. I do see problems, but I don't see confrontation with the wealthy as the solution. Rather I'd see educating the wealthy as the solution. And consulting with them and working side by side with them.

 

[Machjo]

In some ways, we could view the Green Party as a kind of structuralist party too, at least on the environmental front. For example:

Conservative Party (capitalist): let the current injustices continue.

NDP (socialist): raise income taxes and introduce an emissions cap. Neither of these are integrated. An since the tax has no bearing on the environment, a separate emissions cap is then needed requiring a bureaucracy to impelment. As a result, we would forever be dependent on the emissions cap and on the bureaucracy since the income tax itsel does nothing to discouragethe free market itself to reduce consumption.

Green Party (structuralism): The gas tax would cause the free market itself to react positively to the environment without the need for bureaucratic regulatory agencies. The market would just take care of itself. This would be a fine example of a structrualist mindset. It aims at achieving certain socialist objectives, not by attacking the market, but rather by working with it, integrating socialist and capitalist objectives to ensure they all work harmoniously as one whole rather than disconnecedly as is the case with capitalism and socialism treated as separate entities.

 

[china]

Machjo'

Conservative Party (capitalist): let the current injustices continue.

My dear Machjo,Why do you call conservative party a"capitalist" .? There is no true capitalism in Canada,there never has bin since the loyalists started running the country .There is allot of capitalism in China though ,communist China ....what a paradox.
Come back to China Machjo,just for a while ; I know you miss it.