Debate : 20096

Off-Topic / Debate / 20096

20095 | 20097

Subject:	Re: Break Out the Cristal (trickle-down economics explained with champagne!)
Newsgroups:	lugnet.off-topic.debate
Date:	Tue, 1 Apr 2003 20:28:51 GMT
Viewed:	2232 times

Larry Pieniazek wrote: <big snip>... > I'll stand by my assertion. The US is superior to the DPRK(2) by this > prosperity based metric. The DPRK system isn't working now and has no > prospects of working better in future. It's also superior to the DPRK by a > human rights metric. Therefore, to say that the US and the DPRK ought to be > equal (for example both having one vote on the UN HRC, or both having one > vote on how UN funds ought to be spent) strikes me as false. I found an op > ed yesterday (but can't find it now) arguing this very point...that based on > what is being decided, different countries ought to get different sized > votes... the one I like was a vote based on proportional contribution to the > UN budget. Uh, Lar, that may not be such a good idea - the US has a long history of failing to pay US dues. If the vote was based on current, true, paid-up dues, there would be many times when the US would have ZERO votes due to being in arrears. The idea makes sense to me, but with our past history, it wouldn't bode well for the US. -- | Tom Stangl, Sun ONE Internet Technical Support, Sun Microsystems | Sun ONE Support - http://www.sun.com/service/sunone/software/index.html | Please do not associate my personal views with my employer

Message has 1 Reply:

		Re: Break Out the Cristal (trickle-down economics explained with champagne!)
(...) That's part of the original argument. If we don't get a vote unless we're paid up, we (and other nations as well) will be falling all over ourselves to pay up. ESPECIALLY if we get a 25% or so vote because of it. I think there are a lot of (...) (24 years ago, 1-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Message is in Reply To:

		Re: Break Out the Cristal (trickle-down economics explained with champagne!)
(...) Thanks for trying to clear this up. Use potential, use probability, whatever you like... what I was trying to convey was the likeliehood that a system of government will be able to continue to deliver (1) higher quality of life, higher (...) (24 years ago, 28-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

79 Messages in This Thread:

Entire Thread on One Page:: Nested: All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear: All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:: Nested: All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear: All | Brief | Compact