w00pla

Romania is actually one of the fastest growing countries in Europe and is upper middle income.

In my country (South Africa), 2/3rds of the population voted for a president who is known to be corrupt. He is on the verge of giving his friend (who organized him a bribe) a presidential pardon.

What is shocking for me is not that the president is corrupt - but that he has the support of 66% of the population. The majority of the population approves of his corruption. Is there anything redeemable in a country if the majority thinks corruption is okay?

> International isolation worked fairly well for South Africa.

Not really. South Africa's main exports were mainly commodities and anything it imported it imported through proxies (such as Taiwan or Israel). Disinvestment was a major boon to South Africans since it allowed them to buy foreign assets at cents to the rand.

Sanctions also increased the Laager mentality which probability increased the length of Apartheid.

The reasons why South Africa turned to CODESA had probably more to do with the happenings in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe (since South Africa’s biggest problem was that the ANC&SACP movements were funded by the USSR).

Btw, I don’t know why you say that it worked, when by all objective measures black people are worse off now than under Apartheid (e.g. a 13 year drop in life expectancy). South Africa is on track to become a failed state in 10-15 years.

See this link for a comparison: http://www.reddit.com/r/AskReddit/comments/aja38/nonamerican...

> First off, prison labor hasn't been phased-out in the United States, quite the contrary; it's at an all-time high.

AFAIK, all labour in USA prisons is voluntary and paid (i.e. it is not part of punishment).

Most countries (including the USA AFAIK) also ban the use of prison labour for non-governmental work. If this requirement is removed, the government can recuperate much more money from prisoners (that they lose due to the cost of their incarceration).

> Secondly, three-strikes laws have proven to be completely effete at combating non-violent crime. Drug possession charges, which have seen the widest adoption of three-strike laws, have tripled since 1982. Meanwhile, violent crime has dropped steadily

All types of crime are related. A reason for the drop in violent crime may be an increase in incarceration of the number of drug users.

> Have you seen incarceration rates for the US lately? The amount of people locked up is insane (760 per 100k, in Europe it’s between 70 and 200 per 100k).

Yes. This means that the system isn’t an effective deterrent. What changed in the US justice system the past 60 years?

> And crime rates aren’t any lower than those in Europe.

It is difficult to compare crime rates with different countries. Each country has a different population and economic issues. The USA has much more illegal immigrants, minorities and drug users.

> Could you give some more details on the Japanese judical system?

Japan has a very high conviction rate and they retain the death penalty.

Singapore is better example – they have an efficient justice system with stiff penalties (they retain both corporal punishment and capital punishment) which results in extremely low levels of crime.

> and tend to favor phasing out prison terms for non-violent offenders,

So, white collar criminals shouldn't serve prison sentences? How should we punish non-violent white-collar criminals? Take away their holiday homes?

> It's the intellectually lazy, "Common-sense", Joe-Sixpack politics of 3-strikes laws that got us into this mess. "Lock criminals up and throw away the key, I say!"

Most countries have laws that separate habitual criminals from society. Most people view prison as having four purposes:

1. Rehabilitation (i.e. change the behaviour of a convicted individual through positive (reward) and negative (punishment) reinforcement).

2. Punishment

3. Protect the public by separating harmful individuals.

4. Serve as a deterrent to potential criminals.

The “three strikes” and similar laws in other countries are clearly to protect the public by separating habitual criminals from society. This is completely reasonable.

The deterrent effect has two components – the severity of the punishment and the effectivety of the prosecution. If a criminal believes he can escape prosecution, the deterrent effect will not work.

Unfortunately the left did the most damage to the judicial system. Firstly, prison sentences aren’t a deterrent any more. In the old days you received a prison sentence with “hard labour” - this was removed because the left opposed it – in most countries prisoners sits around all day doing nothing (this also increases the cost of incarceration).

The same goes to work – it was usual practice to set prisoners to work in their community on government property/parks. This not only reduced the cost of their incarceration but served as a powerful deterrent to people who see them and shows them the disappointment that society views their actions.

In my country the left started “improving” the criminal and justice system (with almost all the suggestions leftist suggestions). Unfortunately violent crime tripled in 15 years and all other crimes increased.

It is unfortunate that the same justice system that “Joe sixpack” likes works so effective in countries such as Singapore or Japan.

/rant

> Google appears to be only accepting e-mail customer queries, to which it pledges to reply in one to two days -- far too long, say most people who are complaining online.

This is the classic sign of bad service.

You can see this with any bad company (such as ISP) - they want non-telephonic complaints so that it takes an extensive time to respond and most people just give up.

IMHO mopping isn't really an issue - it is fairly fast. What is a drag is sweeping or vacuuming the room before you mop.

That is surely something that can be done by an ordinary roomba?

Fair trade is a first World scam. What fair trade does is mandate the price of certain commodities.

This in effect negates the biggest advantage of developing countries (cheap labour) and allows the products to be manufactured in developed countries at a "fair" price.

Fair trade, along with agricultural subsidization is some of the most evil things that developed countries do.

> insanely, hysterically excited about it's own deindustrialization.

Yeah, I tried to get a bunch of 16 year old Americans to make a bunch of shoes. Apparently they were not interested :(

American deindustrialisation is not only caused by cheap labour in other countries, it is caused by the educational choices of Americans. Engineering isn't exactly the most popular thing in American universities. There is still plenty of room for hi-tech industries in first world countries (semiconductor manufacturing, specialised steel, electronic design, mechanical design, high-end software development, etc…) while still not begrudging third world countries’ jobs (textiles, assembly jobs, etc…).

> 1) People in USA/Canada/Other western world are _addicted_ to products made in misery (in China, for example)

The act of buying something made in a third world country greatly reduces the misery (by providing a job and an income to a person).

Btw, people in China have a pretty good lifestyle when compared to other people in third world countries - all thanks to Americans buying their stuff.

English second language speakers (like myself) often use words out of place or the wrong words. The reasons for that is simple - often you think of something but there is no direct translation (there aren't a one to one mapping between words in languages). Another reason is that you have to keep on using new words - otherwise you will end up with the vocabulary of a five year old.

This is one aspect of the USA that is extremely good. There is space for states to do different things. If something doesn't work, people have the ability to vote with their feet.

Another aspect of this is the right to work laws vs. pro-Union laws in some states.

It would be sad if this aspect of the USA disappears (with a more powerful federal government).

I have a huge problem with this edition of IEEE spectrum. It seems as if the editor tried to turn the version of IEEE spectrum into a political activist magazine (it is supposed to be a technical magazine for electronic and electric engineers covering technological developments, etc…).

The main article in that edition is “Powerless in Gaza” which is more political than technical (even if it were technical, it is not relevant).

Another article is supposed to be about Finland’s nuclear waste disposal system (by Sandra Upson) – which could have been extremely interesting if it wasn’t for the author’s completely unscientific anti-nuclear rant. This ridiculous article was discussed elsewhere: http://www.theresilientearth.com/?q=content/crank-week-decem...

The “Math Quiz: Why do men predominate” is also one of those political articles. What is worse, the final page that is supposed to contain data, contains a graph that is illegible and data that doesn’t support the premise.

Worst IEEE Spectrum edition ever (in all fairness, it was a December edition).

> The stereotypical example is wars in the names of deities.

Another stereotypical example is oppression and murder in the name of state atheism.

> specifically the anti-atheists

I've never met an anti-atheist. Yet social sites such as this or reddit.com seems filled with militant foaming-around-the-mouth atheists. I sincerely hope that the reddit trend doesn’t spread to ycnews.

Really? Why?

Most churches take care of homeless and the helpless and help members of their congregation (in whatever situation, including bereavement).

In the USA, a lot of the top tier universities were started by churches. Surely this isn’t a bad thing? AFAIK, almost 30% of hospitals in the USA are owned by the Catholic Church.

The Catholic Church (which receives most of its money from abroad) basically built the education and healthcare system of Lesotho (as an example).

Saying that they aren’t charities just because you have an irrational hatred towards churches isn’t a reason. If you want an echo chamber for religion bashing, you should maybe try www.reddit.com/r/atheism.

> 2. Allow any doctor in a country with reasonably competent medical standards to practice in the United States.

Not even that. Canada gets many South African doctors (most of which are fairly competent). In addition to this, they continually monitor doctors. So, if an incompetent doctor slips through, he is quickly caught and his license is revoked.

Smoking isn't antisocial at all. Smokers are usually the most friendly people I know. Some of the best social things I have done is smoking a cigarette on a train station in a 3rd world country - it brings people together. If someone offers you a cigarette you would be an uppity idiot to decline.

You can walk up to a strange smoker and ask him for a light. Taking a smokebreak outside while there is a complete smoker outside turns strangers into friends.

Not anti-social at all - having a stick up your ass because you dislike smoking is.

As soon as the dollar pegged.

This is referred to as Carbon Intensity. The problem is that China is less developed than the USA and therefore has a higher carbon intensity.

But the government promised to lower it by 40 percent by 2020.

I agree with your sentiments but not your facts.

> For example, consider the Maldives, with 300,000 people making about $5k/year.

The sea level of the Maldives fell by more than 20cm since the 70ies. If the worst of the IPCC predictions come to pass, then the Maldives will still be better of in 2100 than in 1970.

Here is a reference - but you can find many more using Google:

http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/fpcomment/archive/2...

> If white males were being treated differently so were being held back, that would be a major problem, but that's not the case

In some cases this is a problem. A larger problem is the gender preference of studies. White males tend to study subjects such as engineering at a much higher rate than women. Women in turn studies courses such as education and BA at a much greater rate.

The problem (at least here) is that in University of Technologies and engineering departments, women are promoted – which causes a severe imbalance.

I would prefer it however if the government stop all admission preferences (race, gender, etc…) and abstain from attempts at social engineering. The best approach would be to make the process "blind" by removing names and anything that can indicate gender or race from the application process.

Isn't the stereotype that India is more "lazy" than China?

Is anyone a little disturbed about that website? From the title "Evolution, development, and random biological ejaculations from a godless liberal".

On the sidebar: "The Rise of Atheism, Global Atheist Convention".

This guy is some type of Atheist cult member.

> one of the main industries in Iceland due to

Iceland is a geologic freak which allows for geothermal energy generation. Even though it has this, the energy production isn't that great.

AFAIK, Iceland generates about 1336MW total capacity (calculated from CIA world factbook calculations). A modern nuclear power plant generates 1600MW.

A large aluminum smelter uses 1GW of power or even more (that is why they are often next to hydroelectric dams).

Also note that the EU emits about 70% of the Carbon dioxide that the US does.

Calculation:

Production per year kW hours 11710000000

Production per day (kWh) 32082191.78 Production per hour (kW) 1336757.991

MW: 1336.757991

Of course there are other reasons. The United states is more affluent which means that more people will drive cars. The USA also has a lower population density which means that CO2 caused by transportation would be lower.

Many countries (such as Germany and some Eastern European countries) use natural gas in electricity generation in some places. This has lower carbon emissions, yet is substantially more expensive. It would also be interesting to consider CO2 imports and exports (if you buy a product that was manufactured in another country, then you import CO2). As an example, power hungry aluminium smelters are located where electricity is the cheapest. Yet everybody uses aluminium.

I would also like a citation for the “example, US's GDP is slightly less than the EU's but our CO2 emissions are double the EU.” statement.

> For example, US's GDP is slightly less than the EU's but our CO2 emissions are double the EU

The biggest reason for this is France which generates the majority of its power (80%+) from nuclear power stations.

The environmentalists were extremely successful in the 70ies and 80ies to ensure that the USA does not use nuclear power. Since then their coal power stations have done untold damage to human health (particulate matter, mercury, sulphur emissions, etc...).

Hmmm... this is difficult. Usually when they talk about Africans it is a pseudonym for black Bantu groups (San excluded).

That is why statements such as "Africans have more genetic variation than anyone else on Earth" is meaningless. It is like comparing Spaniards to Koreans and saying there are plenty of variation.

> First, please don't give German lessons if you don't speak German.

I did not claim to speak German. (I can understand German when read or speaken slowly to, btw). Also note that your German "translation" is not a translation at all, but a paraphrase of the paragraph in English. The words "thrown off by the lowest layers of the old society" never occurs in the German sections.

The correct translation for "diese passive Verfaulung der untersten Schichten der alten Gesellschaft" is "the passive rotting bottommost section of the old society".

Don't give German lessons if you do not speak German.

Also note that Marx de-humanises the people (by calling them "rotten".

> When totalitarian hellholes call themselves "people's democratic republic of whatever",

Because all those groups professes a Marxist philisophy (e.g. The democratic People's Republic of Korea). I personally attribute most of Africa's problems to Marxism. Almost all of the failed states' parties professes a Marxist ideology.

No-one can point to a communist country that works. Every communism/Marxist country that fails, is said to be "not truly communist". Yet there are many variations of free market countries and they are all at least moderately successful.

> You do realize that "what Marx actually preached" and "what happened in Soviet Russia" don't have to be the same thing, right?

Looks like the no true Scotsman fallacy?