Is bee smarter than human?

[Fred]

Yes i define as ideology the one we try to "implant" in your head.
I agree Theology could be one too.

first driver was stockholder, partner in NOKIA, driving 400 000 euros car!
Ain't that REAL SOCIALISM? I think it is!

I am not sure, this is very dangerous.You give policemen too much power
As soon a equality no longer exists, everything is possible.For example the rich driver will give 10 000$ to the policeman so he will give only a small penalty.You see, we are back to the beginning

[ivconic]

Yes i define as ideology the one we try to "implant" in your head.
I agree Theology could be one too.


I am not sure, this is very dangerous.You give policemen too much power
As soon a equality no longer exists, everything is possible.For example the rich driver will give 10 000$ to the policeman so he will give only a small penalty.You see, we are back to the beginning

No,no. It only looks like that but it is not.
Policeman can not decide nothing there. There is law which is defining clear border between social groups of people. If man belongs to one social group than he will have to pay one penalty, and other from other social group another penalty. Pretty fair, isn't it?
In other countries...my country...your country....both drivers will pay same penalty. But it is not fair. I have (for example) 200 euros monthly incomes and 500e penalty is total bust for me. Nokia stockholder has (for example) 100 000e monthly incomes and 500e penalty for him is a joke!
See?
He can affrord to break such law often because he can affrod to pay, i can not! See? Great phylosophy and pretty fair is if both of us are divided in separate social groups and we pay different penalties, suitable to our status.
That kind of constitution is more fair. Both drivers are equaly prevented to break the laws.
In that case i (poor man) would not be resentful on fact that next to me there are crazy rich people, doing whatever they want, because the should not be able and allowed in such constitution.
In other countries (with equal penalties) rich people can do freely what they want, can afford to do - and poor people can not cose otherwise they will be busted and lost forever.
I think it is splendid example showing pretty fair relations in good constituted society. Socialism means equal rights but not total equality. Socialism allowing rich people to be rich. But also obligates equal rights between all social groups. So for me; equal right is when rich people are paying more than poor people in same situations; penalties, taxes, public services etc...etc...

[ivconic]

Good organisation and clear division on social categories. We all are not the same. We do not have same possibilities. We all do not have same chances. So...we don't need to be the same at all. So penalties, taxes, various expenses also must be divided by social categories too. See? That is social equality.

[ivconic]

'"...For example the rich driver will give 10 000$ to the policeman so he will give only a small penalty.You see, we are back to the beginning..."

I missed this. Yes you are right. But that's why we need evolution of human mind. Until than there is almost perfect control; so if policeman accept 10 000$ he will lose his job and go to jail. And if Nokia stockholder offer such sop to policeman he is risking even more! There are cameras covering whole the traffic, connected to survey system and main database.
We already have such advanced technology. It is not a big deal to control such things at all.

[ivconic]

Great example could also be UK hooligans! In the near past those presented HUGE threat for sport and sport events in UK. Where are those today?
Look today's stadiums in UK. No more steel fences!? How come?
Point is; until our minds evolute, there are many "transition" methods to overcome some bad occurences...

[J_Player]

Great example could also be UK hooligans! In the near past those presented HUGE threat for sport and sport events in UK. Where are those today?
Look today's stadiums in UK. No more steel fences!? How come?
Point is; until our minds evolute, there are many "transition" methods to overcome some bad occurences...

In USA the penalty is the same for all drivers. But the rich man cannot continue to pay penalties because after 4-5 times making traffic violations his driver license will be suspended or revoked, exactly same law for poor man.

The place where the rich man is equalised for penalties is when it is time to pay taxes for his earnings. Of course the rich man must pay more tax because he receives more money. But more percentage of his earnings is taken as well. For a man who earns $1000/month, he may end up paying $200 depending on circumstances of how many children and expenses. But for a man who earns $100,000/month, it is probable he will pay $50,000 for tax. So rich man pays 50% when poor man pays maybe 20%. And a man who earns no money can get free food from the government and other private charities.

The funny thing is there never was any tax to pay to the USA government for the money you earn until 1913 when they made a law for all people from every state to pay tax. This would be similar to the idea of the European Union making a law that all people who live in countries that are members of the EU must pay taxes directly to the EU depending on how much money they earn.

The idea of paying tax to the federal government of the USA is only one of many changes that moved the USA away from a government by the common people toward government by somebody different than the common people. The original idea of the people who started this country was to get away from somebody else deciding how the people must have their laws. They even made laws that the common people had the right to use guns to protect themselves in case the government was not doing what they wanted, and sent military after them. Their original idea was to give all the freedom to the common people so they could have their own laws and their own country. But slowly many of these laws have been changing to more similar laws as socialist laws. People here don't seem to notice too much because they were not there to see the problems that caused the first rules to be made for the country. And if you ask the average USA citizen about this history, they usually don't know too much about the details other than some important names and dates.

In the former Yugoslavia, I remember the 1984 Winter Olympics were shown on TV. I remember the beautiful modern city of Sarajevo that was shown. The reporters made many interviews of USA athletes and a few interviews of athletes from other countries. I was wondering why we did not see very many interviews of citizens or even athletes from Yugoslavia. It seemed obvious the news stations here only wanted to show the USA athletes, and a few other athletes who won medals from other countries.

But I was interested to see more of the people from Yugoslavia, and some more details from this country. I knew it was considered a communist country that broke away from the Russian version, and I wanted to see more of the people who built this great city. It is as you say, there was not much focus on the city or country at that time.

What is interesting is Tito's part in bringing Yugoslavia to the level of civilisation they achieved. He was one of the great leaders who decided to break away from the Russian version of communism to use his own idea of representative socialism instead. And this was after years of rebuilding the country following WWII. While he was controversial in many parts of the world, I remember he was mostly responsible for rebuilding the country in a way that gave the citizens the kind of laws they wanted. And at the same time, he encouraged other countries to do the same, especially small countries. Funny how the problems you talked about didn't start until after he was gone.

Best wishes,
J_P

[WM6]

Equality

One example of Equallity, probably known to all, but worth to repeat (even for funny):

The "Not Raising Hogs" business
Honorable Secretary of Agriculture
Washington D.C.

Dear Sir:

My friend,Ed, over at Wells Iowa, received a check for $1000 from the
government for not raising hogs. So, I was wondering if i could get
into the "not raising hog" business next year.

What I want to know is, in your opinion, what is the best kind of
farm not to raise hogs on and what is the best breed of hogs not to
raise? I want to be sure that I approach this endeavor in keeping
with all governmental policies. I would prefer not to raise
Raserbacks but if that is not a good breed not to raise then I will
just as gladly not raise Yorkshires or Durocs.

As I see it, the hardest part of this program will be in keeping an
accurate inventory of how many hogs I have not raised. My friend,Ed,
is very joyful about the future of this business. He has been
raising hogs for 20 years and the best he ever made on them was $422
in 1968, until this year when he got your check for $1000 for not
raising hogs.

If I get $1000 for not raising 50 hogs will I get $2000 for not
raising 100 hogs? I plan to operate on a small scale at first,
holding myself down to about 400 hogs not raised which will mean
about $80,000 the first year. Then I can afford an airplane.

Now, another thing. These hogs I will not raise will not eat
1,000,000 bushels of corn. I understand that you also pay farmers
for not raising corn and wheat. Will I qualify for payments for not
raising wheat and corn not to feed the 4,000 hogs I am not going to
raise?

Also I am considering the "not milking cows" business so please send
me any information you have on that, too.

In view of these circumstances you understand that I will be totally
unemployed and plan to file for unemployment and food stamps. You can
be sure you will have my vote in the coming election.

Patriotically Yours,


P.S. Would you please notify me when you plan to distribute more
free cheese?
------------------------------------------------
What do you mean about "NOT DETECTING TREASURE" business?
------------------------------------------------

[ivconic]

"..Funny how the problems you talked about didn't start until after he was gone..."

Bravo! You have very good observation here! It was exactly like that.
He died in May 1980. And first problems started in 1981. Yet, country was strong enough, so we noticed rice of problems much later...maybe in 1987/88.
Tito was "strong hand" leader, yet far away from being any kind of dictator.
That's because he was very smart leader.
There are some people saying Tito was "soft" dictator. In some period he removed many politicians from their functions. But if we make detailed analyze now, we will see that those removed politicians were wrong at some point, made mistakes somewhere. One party system...hmmm...could be bad but also could be good. Today we have hundred small parties and it is complete chaos! Democracy is also kind of utopia - good idea, but not possible in reallity, at least not yet. Again it is up to human minds and evolution. Tito's era is real proof that one party system could be very good transition solution. Today it is not possible anymore.

[ivconic]

One example of Equallity, probably known to all, but worth to repeat (even for funny):

The "Not Raising Hogs" business
Honorable Secretary of Agriculture
Washington D.C.

Dear Sir:

My friend,Ed, over at Wells Iowa, received a check for $1000 from the
government for not raising hogs. So, I was wondering if i could get
into the "not raising hog" business next year.

What I want to know is, in your opinion, what is the best kind of
farm not to raise hogs on and what is the best breed of hogs not to
raise? I want to be sure that I approach this endeavor in keeping
with all governmental policies. I would prefer not to raise
Raserbacks but if that is not a good breed not to raise then I will
just as gladly not raise Yorkshires or Durocs.

As I see it, the hardest part of this program will be in keeping an
accurate inventory of how many hogs I have not raised. My friend,Ed,
is very joyful about the future of this business. He has been
raising hogs for 20 years and the best he ever made on them was $422
in 1968, until this year when he got your check for $1000 for not
raising hogs.

If I get $1000 for not raising 50 hogs will I get $2000 for not
raising 100 hogs? I plan to operate on a small scale at first,
holding myself down to about 400 hogs not raised which will mean
about $80,000 the first year. Then I can afford an airplane.

Now, another thing. These hogs I will not raise will not eat
1,000,000 bushels of corn. I understand that you also pay farmers
for not raising corn and wheat. Will I qualify for payments for not
raising wheat and corn not to feed the 4,000 hogs I am not going to
raise?

Also I am considering the "not milking cows" business so please send
me any information you have on that, too.

In view of these circumstances you understand that I will be totally
unemployed and plan to file for unemployment and food stamps. You can
be sure you will have my vote in the coming election.

Patriotically Yours,


P.S. Would you please notify me when you plan to distribute more
free cheese?
------------------------------------------------
What do you mean about "NOT DETECTING TREASURE" business?
------------------------------------------------

Same situation now in Serbia! Somebody is crazy. We onle need to find which one of us here in this country!?

[WM6]

Same situation now in Serbia! Somebody is crazy. We onle need to find which one of us here!?

This mean Free Market: anyone can raise and sell whatever they want.

Obviously this only applies to landmines.

[ivconic]

"...In USA the penalty is the same for all drivers. But the rich man cannot continue to pay penalties because after 4-5 times making traffic violations his driver license will be suspended or revoked, exactly same law for poor man.

The place where the rich man is equalised for penalties is when it is time to pay taxes for his earnings. Of course the rich man must pay more tax because he receives more money. But more percentage of his earnings is taken as well. For a man who earns $1000/month, he may end up paying $200 depending on circumstances of how many children and expenses. But for a man who earns $100,000/month, it is probable he will pay $50,000 for tax. So rich man pays 50% when poor man pays maybe 20%. And a man who earns no money can get free food from the government and other private charities.

The funny thing is there never was any tax to pay to the USA government for the money you earn until 1913 when they made a law for all people from every state to pay tax. This would be similar to the idea of the European Union making a law that all people who live in countries that are members of the EU must pay taxes directly to the EU depending on how much money they earn.

The idea of paying tax to the federal government of the USA is only one of many changes that moved the USA away from a government by the common people toward government by somebody different than the common people. The original idea of the people who started this country was to get away from somebody else deciding how the people must have their laws. They even made laws that the common people had the right to use guns to protect themselves in case the government was not doing what they wanted, and sent military after them. Their original idea was to give all the freedom to the common people so they could have their own laws and their own country. But slowly many of these laws have been changing to more similar laws as socialist laws. People here don't seem to notice too much because they were not there to see the problems that caused the first rules to be made for the country. And if you ask the average USA citizen about this history, they usually don't know too much about the details other than some important names and dates...."


There are some good moves that USA already did on social plan. I am ocasionaly following situation there. Personally i don't like to much freedom at some points there and to few at others.
But certainly USA has gone far already solving some social issues.
Main objection i could put only on USA foreign politics and behavior. To much attention oriented outdoor while indoor there are still much issues to be solved.
"To defend our democracy"....right, i agree. But who's attacking it? Nobody as i see. Nobody have slitest wish to attack and mix in inner USA affairs.
USA finds to much enemies where they actually don't exist.
I would respect USA much more if those turn to themselves and deal with own affairs, rather than to mix in anything out of USA borders.
But problem is not in people there. Many smart and good people there.
Problem is in those ultra rich and powerfull companies and trusts who own real power there. Those are real creators of USA politics. To maintan and multiply capital, those must go further out of USA borders. To much millitary power, to much guns, to much mixing and interfering in others lives.
That is bad.
Instead investing such money in science and bettering human life, those are more ready to invest in wars and crises.
War for oil? Why? There are much better ways to provide energy. Much cleaner and less hazardous for nature. Who need oil anymore? Todays knowledge and technology is quite enough to give alternative solutions.
I've seen documentary on tv showing experimental solar plants in Mexico, established by some German company. One whole city is powered by solar plant and everything works perfectly well. Energy collected from that plant is more than sufficient for their needs. They don't need wood, coal and oil anymore!
So why fighting so much over oil resources? Money, habit, not ready for changes yet...
Main USA (and world) problem is in that group of ultra rich and powerfull trusts and companies. Those must change or dissapear.

[ivconic]

Ha! Hear this!
It is not secret anymore that USA started campaign in Afghanistan not to catch Usama but to provide distant (out of public attention) free area to grow poppy! No..i am not joking! It is true!
Whole operation was generated by CIA.
Today, huge occupied area in Afghanistan is very well secured and conducted by US army. Afghanistan people are working there for very small fee. Huge areas covered with poppy plantations, kept as secret as possible.
Why poppy? Drugs!
It is already well known that CIA's subsistence was financed from drug bussines for several decades. All operations and activities are also financed from such money.
You may laugh on this because it looks like sf (those counted on that), pitty it is not.
That is also the answer on question why USA occasionaly mixing in South American affairs. Cuba, Panama, Columbia....
Answer is DRUGS! Money! Power!
...
Does ordinary USA citizen know these facts?
I don't think so...

Now is Iraq on the "table". We will see what will grow there!

And in near future is Iran on the "table". Unless EU do something to prevent that war.

[WM6]

Bourgeois (capitalist) revolution was initiated following the motto:

Liberté, Egalité, Fraternité
where is now Liberté?
where is now Egalité?
where is now Fraternité?

[ivconic]

"Liberté, Egalité, Fraternité" !!!
What's that? Hippy parole?
Mary Ann is nice girl!

[WM6]

"Liberté, Egalité, Fraternité" !!!
What's that? Hippy parole?

No, it is motto of the Next Revolution.

You know: history repeats itself!