...okay. Maybe concerts are more successful than I had believed. I apologise and withdraw.![]()
...okay. Maybe concerts are more successful than I had believed. I apologise and withdraw.![]()
I found this quite interesting:
[IMG]http://api.ning.com/files/BogY32b8Oe9Gr7AppWMoaEm3TBj7ToPKU6DxzUI3VzjoTieTmU lw13bW*N*ON6TL3knD5A9DbRoAWlthInNKWvKrjS9TLZl0/IllusionofChoice.jpg[/IMG]
Science Is But An Organized System Of Ignorance"Pornography: The thing with billions of views that nobody watches" - WhiteManBehindADesk
But....They weren't complaining about their situation (ok, they have always been weak whiny bitches) when they were making the big coin and enjoying the career that comes from major label support and extensive radio play.
Korn are a pack of cockheads, They have only ever made shit worthless music and that effort is no better.
Write some lyrics dick heads, write some music, make something real, and then you might have a career rather then just being bitter that the fad you were riding has finished.
Exactly right man.
Same reason I don't donate to the salvation army. The sallies are "Christians helping" well then Christians can pay to help and they can advertise with their own money. The church is one of the wealthiest organisations in the world and they beg us for money to help them help the less fortunate and give Christians the good name. I have spent several days volunteering at a Christian food bank before and will happily empty my wallet of spare change for any other organisation that isn't backed by one of the wealthiest organisations in the world.
Youse guys are just weird. There. I said it.
The first four Sabbath albums all stand as originals of heavy rock. They are one of a piece - a continuum of the genre from its vibrant birth. And the 5th album, Sabbath Bloody Sabbath is a bonus almost equal to the first 4.
To be fair give Led Zeppelin a similar nod for their first 4 albums which are also of a piece.
Which raises the question - any other bands/artists produced 4 extraordinary albums in a row? Pretty rare. Bowie? Neil Young? Yes? Emerson Lake and Palmer did. Metallica? Certainly the Beatles. Youtoo??
I could list dozens of bands....
Iron Maiden, Judas Priest, Megadeath, Overkill, Accept, have all had longer runs of classic albums.
here you go many "free" movies...
this one is a must watch
Stephen
"Look, Madame, where we live, look how we live ... look at the life we have...The Republic has forgotten us."
I didn't think!!! I experimented!!!
Mashie you are a good fella your heart is in the right place and you think about stuff. Respect.
I gotta disillusion you though. The idea that money can be abandoned was tried quite a few years ago. Specifically by the hippies in the late 60s - early 70s when they established communes. Tim Shadbolt tells of his commune days when he and others worked on and around the commune then returned to the house at night. Others didn't work cos smoking the weed and acid rock was their thing. But they didn't cook either. Or do anything...
So the activist hippies returned each evening to no food, no laundry, no hygiene, and cold - even the fire had gone out.
It didn't take long for the communes to fall to pieces. Unfortunately money is the simplest means of valuing effort as the hippies discovered. The current system is not perfect but it ain't going away.
For accuracy, the Pennsylvania Dutch (the Amish, Mennonites, Anabaptists) do not use money and they have prospered for centuries. Peaceful honest and hardworking. On the strength of that, Mash is on an admirable track.
My head is in the right place, it has next to nothing to do with my heart... I guess you could consider that a bonus.
The illusion is all yours I'm afraid, no disrespect meant, but that attitude is long in the tooth as far as I'm concerned and if that makes me disilliusioned in the eyes of the intelligencia then that really isn't saying much at all. A commune is a drastically different prospect to an entire country that actually sees the benefits of living in such a way and unless the whole country is involved in the discussion and it is decided by those with a bias or seven, out of date backwards thinking will rule and people will suffer, needlessly so too. Some may decide that that's a hypocritical position to take, in regards to bias, and that I'm pushing a biased view, yet the common sense that "my" idea offers cannot be matched by the money fraternity... they resort to excuses and labels like communal hippies not being able to make a go of it, therefore fully functioning productive thinking human beings will be incapable of living that way. Apples and Oranges. If you aren't going to offer people the choice, a real valid well thought through democratic choice, because you have relied on "evidence" from 50 years ago to decry the feasibility, then there is no chance, I concede that. Fortunately there are plenty of people in this country and across the globe who believe that it is possible. I've met quite a few, even people I've never met before who understand the concept. The youth of today are ripe for accepting such a change. It would be rude not to offer it to them.
I see a simple way to end poverty, homelessness, hunger etc... and it can't be denied because it has never been tried on a level playing field, only ever labelled as a dangerous societal model. So I deny your disillusion on the grounds that it's very very old thinking and that the discussion hasn't been taken to every man, woman and child in the country. Until that happens, we'll never know. Please feel free to try another tack![]()
I didn't think!!! I experimented!!!
No, Its definitely you.
I'm not going to pretend the current system is great though it has certainly achieved some stunning results and of course some less then stellar side effects. However I can't see that you even understand what you are against, and have never succeed in explaining what your proposed system is.
Money is just a form for representing worth, it allows work to be valued to be stored and used/traded at a later date,Banning money won't remove the need and advantages of the mechanism, It would just make life harder.
Removing money would cripple all the infrastructure that keeps people alive, They only survivors would be those that worked from sun up to sun down working a piece of dirt, that is until someone larger came along, ate their food, raped their women, bbq'd their cow and their goat, enslaved their children, and beat them to death.
The problem isn't money, The problem is greed. Every system since the dawn of time has been exploited by people for personal gain.
how do they not use money? Sure they're mired in an 18th century lifestyle by choice but surely they don't grow or provide everything they need: I'm not sure theyd have steel foundries or ability to grow cotton, transform it into cloth and dye it for example. Do they barter it with local non members of their faith/lifestyle? (Everything I know about the Amish I learned from KINGPIN by the way)
Or are they like those hypocritical "exclusive bretheren" who don't use computers but just employ people who do (ever bought anything from Pedo 7?)
I thought elections were decided by angry posts on social media. - F5 Dave
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Bookmarks