is anyone worried about money?

[jraf 0]

dear bill:

a) you worry too much, and you care about money and humanity

b) watching the economy grow on your successors watch is even more painfull. do you think the economy collapsed just because GW took over. naaah, it was an effect of 8 years of...well you lnow what.

c) as a true anarchist i neither give a shit about the economy nor about humanity. if it all goes to hell i will survive very well in my county. might even lead my count to war with your county...let's say over skydiving

jraf

Me Jungleman! Me have large Babalui.
Muff #3275

[billvon 3,120]

>I beg to differ on that. When you can ID and kill MoFos from an unmanned drone
> I'll guarentee they have something a little bit more high speed than a sony
>PC attached . . .

Unmanned RC planes have been flown across the atlantic, and can deliver 'bombs' (loaded with flour) to inside 10 foot targets remotely, via GPS. They can send video back via a wireless link. They even have contests for things like this. They don't kill mofos mainly because that's illegal, but the technology is there and can be ordered out of the backs of RC airplane catalogs and computer magazines. And it's a heck of a lot cheaper than a Predator.

[LouDiamond 1]

Quote

>I beg to differ on that. When you can ID and kill MoFos from an unmanned drone
> I'll guarentee they have something a little bit more high speed than a sony
>PC attached . . .

Unmanned RC planes have been flown across the atlantic, and can deliver 'bombs' (loaded with flour) to inside 10 foot targets remotely, via GPS. They can send video back via a wireless link. They even have contests for things like this. They don't kill mofos mainly because that's illegal, but the technology is there and can be ordered out of the backs of RC airplane catalogs and computer magazines. And it's a heck of a lot cheaper than a Predator.

Is it just me or is that last post deja vu? Seems i've heard that some where before

"It's just skydiving..additional drama is not required"
Some people dream about flying, I live my dream
SKYMONKEY PUBLISHING

[mountainman 0]

As far as technology goes, I look at the whole TerraServer type satellite imaging technology. One of my friends who follows this stuff was telling me that they have allowed them to now take even more detailed photos of places/people. Before, they were only ALLOWED within a certain "closeness", but are now allowed even closer.

I am just trying to say that I bet it is incredible what it is actually capable of when sent to the max. Very cool stuff.

http://www.brandonandlaura.com

[billvon 3,120]

>The UN is not a governing body.

There are representatives there that can make decisions for their respective countries. They can set trade restrictions, restrict arms, and even wage war in extreme cases. Sounds like a governing body to me.

>That is why we will not submit solely to UN authority.

We will not because we choose not to. We want to get all the advantages of being in the UN (ability to place trade restrictions on other countries) but refuse to participate in anything we don't like (kyoto, war crimes court.) As long as we do that, the UN will not be as effective as we might like - and it will be our fault.

Eventually even countries like Iraq will have nuclear weapons and ICBM's. Kennedy's greatest fear was that someday we'd have 15 countries, some unstable, with nuclear weapons - we're halfway there now. On that day, we better pray the UN has a little bit more power than it has now, or we will experience firsthand the effects of being under the influence of a nuclear power that can annhiliate us. And somehow I think we won't like that too much.

[PhreeZone 20]

http://www.digitalglobe.com/

They have some low and medium res stuff there. The printed stuff they sell is just unreal, it looks a lot like an arial survalence and the NSA won't let them but better optics into space. Russian sat time is going cheap now days too. During the last Gulf war the Pentagon bought up all the air time for all the sat's they could to prevent phots from getting leaked, wanna bet the sat is going to start soon again?

Yesterday is history
And tomorrow is a mystery

Parachutemanuals.com

[KawiZX900 0]

i'm really lookin fwd to a tax return, hows that?

Accelerate hard to get them looking, then slam on the fronts and rollright beside the car, hanging the back wheel at eye level for a few seconds. Guaranteed reaction- Dave Sonsky

[KawiZX900 0]

but for some reason or another, we can't get updated maps of the chinese embassy. So that the right target gets hit

Accelerate hard to get them looking, then slam on the fronts and rollright beside the car, hanging the back wheel at eye level for a few seconds. Guaranteed reaction- Dave Sonsky

[Gawain 0]

Quote

but for some reason or another, we can't get updated maps of the chinese embassy. So that the right target gets hit

Right...and it was an accident that the French embassy got hit in Libya in the 80s too...

So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh
Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright
'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life
Make light!

[billvon 3,120]

>i'm really lookin fwd to a tax return, hows that?

Unless you make most of your money from stock dividends, your returns won't change much, even with the few hundred billion tax cut. It will go mostly to the rich (as expected.)

[Gawain 0]

Quote

>The UN is not a governing body.

There are representatives there that can make decisions for their respective countries. They can set trade restrictions, restrict arms, and even wage war in extreme cases. Sounds like a governing body to me.

Bill we follow these resolutions out of the same choice that we lobby for new ones. Again, read their charter. They are not a governing body. Hell, Switerland just joined the UN last year.

Quote

We want to get all the advantages of being in the UN (ability to place trade restrictions on other countries) but refuse to participate in anything we don't like (kyoto, war crimes court.) As long as we do that, the UN will not be as effective as we might like - and it will be our fault.

GW Bush's speech to the UN was clear..."If the UN is to keep its relevance..." We don't need the UN. It wasn't the UN that brought peace in the Balkans, it was not the UN that dissuaded South Africa from persuing a nuclear weapons program, it was not the UN that ended the cold war. The UN has outlived its usefulness. The small fish need to be reminded that they are, in fact, small fish. Small fish do not have the same influence as big fish, nor should it be otherwise. The UN is an ineffective body. If it were, we would not be dealing with Iraq, Iran, DPRK in the manner we are.

Edit to add: BTW, the League of Nations was supposed to provide a unified cooperative body to Europe after WWI... it failed too.

Edit to add (part 2):

Quote

Charter

The Charter is the constituting instrument of the United Nations, setting out the rights and obligations of Member States, and establishing the Organization's organs and procedures.

Purposes

The purposes of the United Nations, as set forth in the Charter, are to maintain international peace and security; to develop friendly relations among nations; to cooperate in solving international economic, social, cultural and humanitarian problems and in promoting respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms; and to be a centre for harmonizing the actions of nations in attaining these ends.

Quote

Eventually even countries like Iraq will have nuclear weapons and ICBM's. Kennedy's greatest fear was that someday we'd have 15 countries, some unstable, with nuclear weapons - we're halfway there now. On that day, we better pray the UN has a little bit more power than it has now, or we will experience firsthand the effects of being under the influence of a nuclear power that can annhiliate us. And somehow I think we won't like that too much.

If Iraq acquires nuclear weapons, we'd all better pray that the UN just shuts the f**k up. Because there will be no time for committees. We can only hope that we know where it is, and that we have the same moral courage that Isreal had in 1981. If anything, the five permanent members of the Security Coucil will draw straws as to who will act first. I do not believe that Iraq will acquire or develop the technology. By way in referece to "under the influence of a nuclear power that can annhiliate us. And somehow I think we won't like that too much" ...did the 50 years of the cold war mean nothing? Did the Cuban missle crisis mean nothing? If Iraq or DPRK thought they could get us to submit, they have another thing coming. It would take a single MX missle to completely dismantle their entire enterprise. Sorry Bill, I think you're worrying too much.

So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh
Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright
'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life
Make light!

[Tonto 1]

I'm worried about money. Making it to payday after Christmas is always tough!

When I was in the US in 92, there was a huge defecit, yet when I was there in 98 it was largely ok. Seems Clinton did OK sorting that one out, but 911 gave GW a (valid) reason so spend beyond a budget. If your house were burgled, you'd put in burglar proofing, maybe an alarm, and dig out the cash to repair the damage - which was probably not in your budget.

As an outsider, I think he's spending too much when you consider what happened in non emotional terms. While the blow was felt worldwide, you could cover it with a bandaid in terms of ecconomic and physical loss, again on a worldwide scale. Thousands more innocents died in Afganistan than on 911.

It seems financially irresponsible. If it were a company and not a country - your shares would be really low right now - and the dollar is dropping against many world currencies. (Even ours! 20% in the last 6 months!)

The US is big though, and the wheel turns. In 10 years time it could all have changed around again - and you guys will make 10 years, dispite what GW suspects Saddam is up to!

t

It's the year of the Pig.

[KawiZX900 0]

I am now living off of whats in the cubbard, ie- tuna, soup, noodles and sauce. I'm almost out of orange juice and can't afford more till payday, i've still got a half quart of berry purree, and just enough money for a full tank of gas, and 20 bucks to play with at costco, probably just O.J and more Naked Juce berry blast.

when in doubt about the future, buy clif bars. 1$ meals they are, and filing too.

Accelerate hard to get them looking, then slam on the fronts and rollright beside the car, hanging the back wheel at eye level for a few seconds. Guaranteed reaction- Dave Sonsky

[Gawain 0]

Quote

when in doubt about the future, buy clif bars. 1$ meals they are, and filing too.

Better than Ramen Noodles?

So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh
Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright
'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life
Make light!

[KawiZX900 0]

Deffinatly more nurishing than ramen noodles, but ramen does have a couple things going for it, it's a 3 course meal, the it's to hot, i'll just sip at it slow course, then the mmmmm hot noodles, my face is flushed course and that was pretty good, i'll just finish what left in a last room temp gulp of water and chicken bullion and pea carrot flec sip..

so hard to say really, but you'll be able to sustain yourself off a clif bar a mile or two longer than with a ramen soup...

Accelerate hard to get them looking, then slam on the fronts and rollright beside the car, hanging the back wheel at eye level for a few seconds. Guaranteed reaction- Dave Sonsky

[Gawain 0]

Kewl..I'll keep an eye out for Clif bars...I'm getting ready to gag at the holiday bills which are in the mail, I'm sure...

So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh
Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright
'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life
Make light!

[wmw999 2,589]

Dunno about Clif bars, but Budget Gourmet frozen dinners are way better than ramen. And they're 84 cents at one of the local groceries.

Wendy W.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[jfields 0]

Quote

Clif bars, but Budget Gourmet frozen dinners

The funny thing is that if you are careful with your meal planning, you can cook and eat real food for pretty damned little.

[billvon 3,120]

>Better than Ramen Noodles?

Friend of Amy's lived on Ramen Noodles in medical school. She got sick and it took them a few days to diagnose her - no one had seen scurvy for years.

[jfields 0]

Quote

Friend of Amy's lived on Ramen Noodles in medical school. She got sick and it took them a few days to diagnose her - no one had seen scurvy for years.

Funny, for someone in med school.

[billvon 3,120]

>The small fish need to be reminded that they are, in fact, small fish.

Spoken like a true imperialist. The big fish should remember that we are, in the end, just another kind of fish, and we all live in the same ocean.

>Small fish do not have the same influence as big fish, nor should it
> be otherwise. The UN is an ineffective body. If it were, we would not
> be dealing with Iraq, Iran, DPRK in the manner we are.

If the UN was ineffective, we would have ignored it and gone straight to war with Iraq. Since we did not, and since Bush was actually persuaded to go through them, they are apparently more effective than you think - if they can cause the US to change their foreign policy.

>If Iraq acquires nuclear weapons, we'd all better pray that the UN just
> shuts the f**k up. Because there will be no time for committees.

Why? What threat will Hussein pose that Castro and Kruschev did not pose? We learned to deal diplomatically with them; we will learn to deal diplomatically with a nuclear Iraq - even if we don't like doing it. The consequences of _not_ doing it are not really acceptable.

And it may not be Iraq. It may be North Korea, or Pakistan, or Afghanistan, or Uzbekistan. Whoever it is, the UN will continue to play a role in putting diplomacy before war.

>We can only hope that we know where it is, and that we have the
> same moral courage that Isreal had in 1981.

You will hold up Israel as an example of someone who has dealt successfully with the threat of terrorism and war?

>By way in referece to "under the influence of a nuclear power that can
> annhiliate us. And somehow I think we won't like that too
> much" ...did the 50 years of the cold war mean nothing?

No! We hated that - we basically had to diplomatically engage an evil empire bent on our destruction. And we did because we had to. We didn't win the cold war because we had more nukes than they did, or because we destroyed more of Moscow than they did of New York. We won because we kept war at bay until our economic system (which is our strongest weapon) outlasted theirs.

Sure, there were threats. There were half a dozen small wars in Afghanistan, Vietnam, Korea etc that at least were peripherally related to the cold war.

> Did the Cuban missle crisis mean nothing?

Another good example. Which war resolved that? Was it resolved through missiles, or through diplomacy (backed up with the threat of war, of course?) Did allowing the evil Castro to exist destroy our country, as Bush claims allowing Hussein to exist may do?

>Sorry Bill, I think you're worrying too much.

I only worry because I hear statements like this:

>It would take a single MX missle to completely dismantle their entire
>enterprise.

How many nukes would it take to make Manhattan, LA and Washington uninhabitable for 10 years? I'd be suprised if it took more than 3. North Korea has 2. Blowing each other to bits isn't really the best solution. Fortunately, we've managed to avoid that so far, and I hope we continue to do so in the future. Diplomacy may be wimpy and boring, but it results in far fewer bodybags.

[kallend 2,150]

Given that the US can't prevent poorly educated Mexican laborers from entering the country, what makes anyone think that the US could prevent Korea from smuggling a nuke into Manhattan? Who needs missiles?

The current threat is Korea, and to a lesser extent Pakistan and India. Iraq is just a sideshow.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[miked10270 0]

HI there,

Surely $20 is plenty to survive on - in my job I've met loads of winos (and not a few WHINO'S) and when you're on a "small" budget you've gotta concentrate on the 4 basic food groups...

NO... Not Beer, MD Wine, Tequila and Cardboard (for the home)...

Sauerkraut's always a good bet (or Coleslaw) - plenty of vitamins and keeps in the fridge for ages, bread, Margerine & cheese, for making cheese and coleslaw sandwiches, cheese on toast (perhaps even with coleslaw underneath...). Tins of Corned Beef and Tuna also survive for ever. Milk.

On a personal note, thanks to a "minorl" error at the bank, coupled with what's called a "Bank Holiday" in the UK I once had the equivalent of $2 to buy food for my family for 4 days!!!!. The above is what we survived on and the spare Saurekraut came in handy for dumping on the bank counter at 0900hrs, Tuesday morning... And yes, it was a bastard to clean off the "Customer Service" counter

Skydiving advice... Satire... And now even cookery and nutrition...

Mike D10270.

PS: Actually I just posted this to see my new pic - guess who's finally bought a scanner

Taking the piss out of the FrenchAmericans since before it was fashionable.

Prenait la pisse hors du FrançaisCanadiens méridionaux puisqu'avant lui à la mode.

[Gawain 0]

Quote

Spoken like a true imperialist. The big fish should remember that we are, in the end, just another kind of fish, and we all live in the same ocean.

So you believe it would be okay for a country like Luxembourg to block UN resoutions that countries like the UK, US, France, Japan, Russia and Germany might support? Or perhaps it would be better to let Albania block a framework advocated by Greece, Turkey, Italy and Northern Africa because of some other dispute they may have? Or perhaps the world should stop, give DPRK more food, oil, aid, and hope they won't ask for more? That's called blackmail.

Quote

If the UN was ineffective, we would have ignored it and gone straight to war with Iraq. Since we did not, and since Bush was actually persuaded to go through them, they are apparently more effective than you think - if they can cause the US to change their foreign policy.

It was not UN ambassadors that urged Bush to use the UN channel, it was Blair and Chirac and other heads of state. And exactly how has our foreign policy changed? Our policy is still regime change in Iraq, DPRK disarmament, Israel and Palestinian states co-existing, ad infinitum. The UN does not dictate foreign policy, nor has our policy changed because of it.

Quote

Why? What threat will Hussein pose that Castro and Kruschev did not pose? We learned to deal diplomatically with them; we will learn to deal diplomatically with a nuclear Iraq - even if we don't like doing it. The consequences of _not_ doing it are not really acceptable.

We did not win the cold war through diplomacy. We won the cold war through a literal "war" of the economies. While ours overheated yet survived. The Soviet system could not keep up, could not fund itself, and further disproved the Leninist/Socialistic model of government.

Also bear in mind, that while we have been at odds with Russia, the former USSR, and eastern Europe in the past, they followed accepted diplomatic methods and protocol. The countries in the middle east do not share that value system or that diplomatic system. They are, in fact, a civilization in decline and cannot be dealt with using a cookie cutter designed for the ROC, USSR, or Czech Republic...

Quote

... the UN will continue to play a role in putting diplomacy before war.

That's their charter.

Quote

You will hold up Israel as an example of someone who has dealt successfully with the threat of terrorism and war?

I will hold up Israel as an excellent example a state which struggles and continues to flourish despite terrorism, wants to use its olive branch, but does not shy away from its obligation to extend it power. We know how effective they are in war...ask Egypt and Syria if they want to get stung again.

Quote

No! We hated that - we basically had to diplomatically engage an evil empire bent on our destruction. ..

That engagement didn't occur until their system was already in decline and Gorbechev and Reagan met in Iceland...also recall, there was no treaty for a long time.

Quote

Did allowing the evil Castro to exist destroy our country, as Bush claims allowing Hussein to exist may do?

Again, it's a difference in mind-set, but Castro in all is no less dangerous. We kicked him out of Grenada. If he could get nukes, he would.

Quote

I only worry because I hear statements like this:

>It would take a single MX missle to completely dismantle their entire
>enterprise.

I did not intend to communicate that as a war monger, simply to provide an example of what deterrence should do! However, I do not believe that Iraq and DPRK believe in deterrence. I believe that they think they could engage us with WMD and "win" despite our stated policy, and ability to ensure otherwise.

Quote

Diplomacy may be wimpy and boring, but it results in far fewer bodybags.

Tell that to Vietnam vets. How long did diplomacy not work under Johnson in efforts to end the conflict there. It wasn't until Nixon gave the green light to Linebacker II which gave the Paris peace talks viability again.

So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh
Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright
'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life
Make light!

[SkymonkeyONE 4]

Quote

Bill,

This is a very provocative piece...as all your threads usually are. My question is a hypothetical: You're President of the United States. With everything going on domestically and internationally, what is your solution? How would President Bill Von Novak handle these many issues?

I am not mocking you here at all. This is a totally serious question.

Chris

I am not Bill, but I do have a no-nonsense answer to your question. What I would do is stop bankrolling the many, many countries we currently do. I would go for an entire year without giving a single penny to any other country or entity and pay that money back into the national debt. I would also put my fist down and demand repayment of the thousands of "loans" we have so freely given out. With this, I would also ensure that I never again see hungry people in our country. It's fascinating that we leave thousands of tons of agricultural harvest to rot because we are too stupid to just hand out the surplus to our hungry.

I figure any country that can't stand on it's own two feet for a year without our near-total subsidization isn't worth the effort. Anyone that thinks we don't have plenty of our own oil in the continental US is mistaken. We are just too caught up in "land conservation" and protecting Red Cockaded Woodpeckers to just drill and thus support our own habits.

Chuck