Really? Never took a physics class?

[OwnyTony]

So it's not an "us vs them" but the "them" are stupid and you're not?  Hmm...

What?  That was the criticism I was pointing at you. The tone of what you wrote before me was heartless and cold.  I totally understand your position as that is my pragmatic position but that does not mean my ideals have to be that way. 

I know ultimately it is "us vs them" as human beings are inherently selfish.  It does not mean that one should expect it, embrace it, and come off in a way where oneself is entitled to act selfishly.

It is nice that we are able to enjoy the benefits of having energy, and although you disagree, it does not mean that we are entitled to the benefits of energy such as air conditioning, electronics, the internet and such. 

Who are you (and i mean you as in plural/every/anybody) that you are entitled to something while someone else pays for it.

[Ducatiloo]

We have and do pay for it.   2 wars against the British, WWII to keep the Germans on the other side of the ocean,  taxes, national dept etc.
I never really thought about it but some cultures are better designed to survive.  Otherwise why isn't the "cradle of life" home to any super powers. Even though  it was not PC what he said it is true.  IMHO designing a government, paying for and protecting a government and society is not the same as acting as if we are entitled to it.  We are used to clean water, computer, ps3 etc etc because of how we and our predecessors laid the stitches of the United States The Americas.  Do I think my country is perfect, no we need to improve as do all other countrys.  Do I love it?  Hell yea with all of my heart down to my last drop of blood

[ducatiz]

What?  That was the criticism I was pointing at you. The tone of what you wrote before me was heartless and cold.  I totally understand your position as that is my pragmatic position but that does not mean my ideals have to be that way. 

I know ultimately it is "us vs them" as human beings are inherently selfish.  It does not mean that one should expect it, embrace it, and come off in a way where oneself is entitled to act selfishly.

selfishness can be a virtue if it is enlightened selfishness.  for instance, is it selfish of me to demand good, clean air and water?  of course it is, because I want it for ME (and my family).  I could give a shit if someone else got it.  Practically, that means that if everyone acts selfishly in the pursuit of things like clean air and water that they will "own" the issue and take it seriously, rather than let some bureaucrat do it for them.

It is nice that we are able to enjoy the benefits of having energy, and although you disagree, it does not mean that we are entitled to the benefits of energy such as air conditioning, electronics, the internet and such. 

Who are you (and i mean you as in plural/every/anybody) that you are entitled to something while someone else pays for it.

I am entitled to it.  I pay for it every month in my electrical/gas/water bills and my taxes and so on.  I am entitled because people fought and died so that we could enjoy these things.  I've put a lot of time and energy supporting the things that I believe in, rather than just coasting along.

It's not heartless to say that people get the society they deserve.  I don't think other people are stupid for not having the things I do, I think they are making choices that I would not make.  Maybe plenty of them ARE stupid, but that's not relevant -- they may not value education, plenty of people don't. 

I remember during the Ethiopian civil war, they were interviewing fighters (it was PBS) and one of them was asked about getting supplies for their children -- food, medical, etc.  he said (i paraphrase) "send us guns.  we can make more children later."

Choices.

[OwnyTony]

I am entitled to it.  I pay for it every month in my electrical/gas/water bills and my taxes and so on.  I am entitled because people fought and died so that we could enjoy these things.  I've put a lot of time and energy supporting the things that I believe in, rather than just coasting along.

It's not heartless to say that people get the society they deserve.  I don't think other people are stupid for not having the things I do, I think they are making choices that I would not make.  Maybe plenty of them ARE stupid, but that's not relevant -- they may not value education, plenty of people don't. 

I remember during the Ethiopian civil war, they were interviewing fighters (it was PBS) and one of them was asked about getting supplies for their children -- food, medical, etc.  he said (i paraphrase) "send us guns.  we can make more children later."

Choices.

Your reasons given for entitlement is not sufficient.  Your not in the position of power here (neither am I) to say that we are entitled to anything.  In the same sense, the power companies should be entitled to charge how much they want.

And the thing about people deserve the societies they have.  What about the children born to those societies. 

[Popeye the Sailor]

Your reasons given for entitlement is not sufficient.  Your not in the position of power here (neither am I) to say that we are entitled to anything.  In the same sense, the power companies should be entitled to charge how much they want.

Earning it doesn't make it yours? Really?

[OwnyTony]

Earning it doesn't make it yours? Really?

Earning it like how?  What entitles us to demand cheap oil.  I mean, arent the middle eastern countries entitled to charge however much they want?  It belongs to them, on their land, so they are entitled to it more than anyone else.  You are not entitle to my property and therefore I am entitled to charge what ever I want for it.  May not mean you will buy it from me.

Hey, I am entitled to buy your Monster from you for $1 and you WILL sell it to me because I am entitled to it. You know why? because im going to fight for it.  Im going to send people your way to take it from you and they may die.  So that fulfills the requirement for people dieing for it.  I support the monster community.  I have my own monster and paid for it (fulfilling the "paying every month for electricity).  Basically, I am going to take your monster from you and therefore I will be entitled to it. (Im sorry for sounding like an ass but I am just trying making a parallel argument.)

What I am seeing is a view that is "America/American" centric.  Sure, we are the "world power" now but that does not mean that we are entitled to other people's stuff.  If someone else becomes the "world power" I dont think our "America" centric views will change but we wont have a faux reason to base our entitlement.  It also does not mean that the new world power should be entitled to our stuff.  Im attempting to bring to light the other side and pointing out that this is a double edged sword.  We can cut our enemies with this logic and also cut oursleves.

[ducatiz]

Earning it like how?  What entitles us to demand cheap oil.  I mean, arent the middle eastern countries entitled to charge however much they want?  It belongs to them, on their land, so they are entitled to it more than anyone else.  You are not entitle to my property and therefore I am entitled to charge what ever I want for it.  May not mean you will buy it from me.

Hey, I am entitled to buy your Monster from you for $1 and you WILL sell it to me because I am entitled to it. You know why? because im going to fight for it.  Im going to send people your way to take it from you and they may die.  So that fulfills the requirement for people dieing for it.  I support the monster community.  I have my own monster and paid for it (fulfilling the "paying every month for electricity).  Basically, I am going to take your monster from you and therefore I will be entitled to it. (Im sorry for sounding like an ass but I am just trying making a parallel argument.)

sounds like you're entitled to it to me..

Might does make Right you know?  Love it or hate it. 

When someone else is more powerful than the US, then we can whine and pregnant dog about it then.  But that's just the way the balls bounce.

What I am seeing is a view that is "America/American" centric.  Sure, we are the "world power" now but that does not mean that we are entitled to other people's stuff.  If someone else becomes the "world power" I dont think our "America" centric views will change but we wont have a faux reason to base our entitlement.  It also does not mean that the new world power should be entitled to our stuff.  Im attempting to bring to light the other side and pointing out that this is a double edged sword.  We can cut our enemies with this logic and also cut oursleves.

yep, it is a double edged sword.

that's why it pays to be a better swordsman.

[OwnyTony]

sounds like you're entitled to it to me..

Might does make Right you know?  Love it or hate it. 

When someone else is more powerful than the US, then we can whine and pregnant dog about it then.  But that's just the way the balls bounce.


yep, it is a double edged sword.

that's why it pays to be a better swordsman.

My objective is to show the other side.  From what you say, it tells me that you at least acknowledge it.  Entitled (for either of us)? maybe not.  Do we benefit.....Yes.  I know thats how the ball bounces but world powers come and go.  That is just history.  And what I was hinting at is that Might does not make right.  I myself would rather be the mighty than the weak but might is not a justification for exploitation.  There is always someone mightier than me/you(plural).

If your stance is "I know that im doing wrong but you cant do a F**king thing about it" then im fine with that.  But it does not make might right.

An undertone of how you say things make it seem like you are invincible.  Being the better swordsman does pay, but we all get old and someone better does and will come along.  There is something called "you reap what you sow" or karma and it has a way of "ironically" presenting itself.  I take the stance that i take to minimize karma being a pregnant dog to me because I am far from perfect.

[B.Rock]

Might does make Right you know?  Love it or hate it. 

The problem with that is that someone else will always be bigger and stronger either now or later, or they'll gang up on you if you're heinous enough. The Japanese were the mightiest in the east for decades and it ended it the complete destruction of their nation and hundreds of thousands killed. The British had a mighty empire which was not nearly as cruel as the Japanese empire and thusly was not treated the same.

[ducatiz]

The problem with that is that someone else will always be bigger and stronger either now or later, or they'll gang up on you if you're heinous enough. The Japanese were the mightiest in the east for decades and it ended it the complete destruction of their nation and hundreds of thousands killed. The British had a mighty empire which was not nearly as cruel as the Japanese empire and thusly was not treated the same.

yep, that is the problem.  whomever is on bottom gets shit.  but recognizing that doesn't change that it's just the natural order of things. 

for example, we'd like to think we're all civilized because we have forums like the UN, but the UN is powerless to do anything unless the Security Council agrees to it, unanimously.  The end result is a lot of feelgood stuff getting done (some useful, some not) and serious issues like regional instability due to terrorism or governmental breakdown often results in little action.

[He Man]

Many children who grow up today don't realize the necessary hardship that must be taken to provide a comfortable living. I don't view it as much as a form of entitlement, but rather appreciation.
No one will ever come out as a full all around winner. Yes as a country we have fought and earned our way into today's world, and we have every right to claim the luxary of living in the states as ours. How many of us sit down and think about how we came to this land? I know i do. I am a first generation born here, and it strikes me deep in the gut when i ever i hear someone talk smack about how we are wrong to have fought every country and fight for what we want. I get furious when i hear people talk shit about our soldiers and how we arent entittled to live. This comes from people who live amoung us, in OUR communities that reap the benefits of this nation. Are THEY entitled to it? According to Ducatizzz, they are. According to Ownytony, they arent. But rahter, if you ask, do they appreciate it? They defintely do not.

This is why children need to be educated and shown how hard it is outside of their parents $180k a year job.

it is strange, many times ,it is the poor who strive to be better and appreciate everything that has come before them, and the rich, who have nothing to work for, that want to find a way to better the world with their money that appreciate the world the most.

Everyone should find a way to teach their children to appreciate the things we take for granted. Religion used to be a good way, but that has folded over in our society.

So back on topic, kind of. We're all going to die in the puddle of shit we made ourselves. The game is, how long we can last, because everything great will come to an end one day. SO what were we talking about anyway? I like water, please dont take it away from me.

[OwnyTony]

Many children who grow up today don't realize the necessary hardship that must be taken to provide a comfortable living. I don't view it as much as a form of entitlement, but rather appreciation.
No one will ever come out as a full all around winner. Yes as a country we have fought and earned our way into today's world, and we have every right to claim the luxary of living in the states as ours. How many of us sit down and think about how we came to this land? I know i do. I am a first generation born here, and it strikes me deep in the gut when i ever i hear someone talk smack about how we are wrong to have fought every country and fight for what we want. I get furious when i hear people talk shit about our soldiers and how we arent entittled to live. This comes from people who live amoung us, in OUR communities that reap the benefits of this nation. Are THEY entitled to it? According to Ducatizzz, they are. According to Ownytony, they arent. But rahter, if you ask, do they appreciate it? They defintely do not.

This is why children need to be educated and shown how hard it is outside of their parents $180k a year job.

it is strange, many times ,it is the poor who strive to be better and appreciate everything that has come before them, and the rich, who have nothing to work for, that want to find a way to better the world with their money that appreciate the world the most.

Everyone should find a way to teach their children to appreciate the things we take for granted. Religion used to be a good way, but that has folded over in our society.

So back on topic, kind of. We're all going to die in the puddle of shit we made ourselves. The game is, how long we can last, because everything great will come to an end one day. SO what were we talking about anyway? I like water, please dont take it away from me.

Ok, I was going to stop posting in this thread because I thought I accomplished putting my point across to Ducatizzz and I felt that how he posted after my remarks were indicative that he acknowledges my points.

The word "entitled" is a strong word.  I have been getting this vibe that this entitlement is based on "might is right".  Also, the topic has been broad.  Yes, I will say we are "entitled" to basic freedoms or to be treated and treat others with basic respect.  But what makes us entitled to luxuries? Electicity is a luxury.  Just because we have come to be accustomed to them does not mean we are entitled to it. That is where we are getting hung up on.  Because we fought for it? Because we won? These things are based on "might is right".  I say that through "might is right" we may have acquired these "luxuries" such as cheep energy but that does not mean we are entitled to them.

Your point about children not realizing the necessary hardships was one of my point when i mentioned that children from civilized countries do not comprehend hunger.  They think the answer is simply going to the fridge to feed yourself.  That shows ignorance as to all the logistics behind what makes that possible such as; having a "stable" government, a stable economic system where people are able to have jobs, systems of moving output so that they are readily available, all sorts of things that make it possible for you to grab something out of the fridge to feed yourself.

In defense of myself of you saying that I do not appreciate what I have, If I claim that we are entitled to nothing, does it not mean that or rather there is some connotation that I am not taking things for granted?  That indeed I do appreciate the benefits?  This is a "yes or no" question.
Who would appreciate something more, someone who feels that they are entitled to it, or someone who does not?  The answer, bluntly stated, is the later. 

I dont want to flame you or anything and it could be a misunderstanding but how can you go about and "judge" rather or not Ducatizzz or I do not appreciate what America has done for us?  Our argument was if we are "entitled" to the benefits we receive.  Not on if we appreciate them or not.  Ducatizzz stance was "I enjoy what I have and we are entitled to the benefits because might is right".  My stance was "just because we are stronger does not mean we are entitled to these benefits but however we acquire them, i do appreciate them."

What I said was a summary and I dont want to put words in Ducatizzz mouth.  If he disagrees than feel free to correct me.

[ducatiz]

I only agree to the extent that you accurately portrayed what I said or did not say and not any less.

[OwnyTony]

I only agree to the extent that you accurately portrayed what I said or did not say and not any less.

Would you clarify?  The only words that I were putting in your mouth was
"I enjoy what I have and we are entitled to the benefits because might is right"

your statement seems a little open ended.

[ducatiz]

Would you clarify?  The only words that I were putting in your mouth was
"I enjoy what I have and we are entitled to the benefits because might is right"

your statement seems a little open ended.

i am just being catty

i think you stated it right.  i am a firm believer in human nature and that being a selfish nature.  that doesn't mean a selfish person doesn't act altruistically, it just means that altruism TRULY is usually within the context of selfish motives.  (That's why rich people always want their names on their grants -- cases in point:
Brought to you by the "John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation."
The Paul G. Allen Family Foundation
The Rockefeller Foundation etc etc.    donate money so people can see how nice you are -- selfish motive.

And I am NOT saying that it is a BAD motive, it is a normal, human desire to be appreciated!  But the base definition is that it is a form of selfishness (i.e. concern for oneself).

Likewise, in the global scheme of things, people have to act selfishly if they are to succeed and not act pathologically altruistic.  Mother Theresa acted in this manner, and while it works for one person, society would fall apart if everyone pulled a "mother Theresa."  There would be no wealth to donate, and poverty would be worse than before.

My comment about "Might makes right" comes from this notion of selfishness.  It is simply the rule of the world.  When two people disagree, they can walk away from one another.  But when two different peoples (societies) disagree, and the disagreement is over who has a right to a limited resource, the result is negotiation and/or armed conflict.

Considering the history of mankind, both paths have been employed since the beginning of time.  The UN was not the beginning of negotiation.  We see examples of it in Babylonian times, under the code of Hammurabi, who actually defined rules for how to talk to an adversary, and even how to retreat.

Some now in the modern like to believe that the ancients were only about killing and fighting, but they are dead wrong.  Even the Romans understood the value of a good negotiation.

That being said, when negotiations break down it is might that determines the new reality - -and the explanation of it in a historical context (i.e. "History is written by the victors"). 

And just like Flavius Josephus on down, the victors NEVER portray themselves as aggressors or acknowledge that their adversary may have had a legitimate claim or complaint.  The victors want history to see them as peaceful, contented people, no matter how bloodthirsty or imperialistic they were.

Might does make right.  Like it or not.