Mike wrote: Jim may be right except for the part where he brings up capitalism to call it "nonsense." And he may be right except for the irrelevant, but typical knee-jerk anti-Bush comment. And he may be right except for the irrlevant point of no money being used in the Federation of Star Trek fame. The quatloo was the monetary unit of Triskelion. It was used to bet on combat outcomes, of which Kirk was an involuntary participant. Unless I am in error, Triskelion was not a member of the so-called non-capitalist Federation. So Jim will have to come up with more imaginative ramblings than this. SJ, I guess I'm not reformed in this area, either.
Interesting.
I said "reformed trekkie" but I actually meant "recovering trekkie", in that I truly regret much of the time and attention I spent watching that and similar TV shows instead of getting out and doing real things like becoming more active in Boy Scouts & playing more sports, which would've served me much better later on in life, I think.
San Jose John wrote: Jim I think you're probably more right than wrong on this one. As a reformed Trekkie... ---
Jim may be right except for the part where he brings up capitalism to call it "nonsense." And he may be right except for the irrelevant, but typical knee-jerk anti-Bush comment. And he may be right except for the irrlevant point of no money being used in the Federation of Star Trek fame. The quatloo was the monetary unit of Triskelion. It was used to bet on combat outcomes, of which Kirk was an involuntary participant. Unless I am in error, Triskelion was not a member of the so-called non-capitalist Federation. So Jim will have to come up with more imaginative ramblings than this.
SJ, I guess I'm not reformed in this area, either.
Jim Lincoln wrote: Why, Mike, You were the one who brought up the Star Trek series. Capitalism was nonexistent in their own little universe.
Jim I think you're probably more right than wrong on this one.
As a reformed Trekkie I do remember a particular episode where Capt. Kirk "negotiated" a 33-percent tax (!) up front on one of the planets they were trying to get to join their "Federation". I believe it was the episode where everyone was dressed-up as 1920's machine-gun-toting gangsters.
This Federation, as they called it, probably still had some form of capitalism (using more of a "credit"-based currency system). Just less of it, and a LOT more central control--centered in more or less of a United-Nations-like "Federation Council"--than our present republic (if it can still be accurately called that!).
Never-the-less Star Trek was easilly one of the most enthralling and skillfully written and produced TV series when I was a kid.
Actually, it was the distraction of the interest rates that really smarts. Yes, Baby Bush did not enforce the laws governing the powers that be in banking and investment. I have to say I don't know if there needed to be new laws, it would've been nice if the enforcers were in bed with the people they were supposing to oversee. There needs to be more control over those who are bunk buddies.
Jim Lincoln wrote: Why, Mike, You were the one who brought up the Star Trek series. Capitalism was nonexistent in their own little universe. For a person who owns some stock, driven down by that famous oilman, Bumbling Bush, apparently I'm probably more capitalist than many on this board. apparently I am paying for my sins for being one. :–7
Bush did that all by his lonesome? Just to pick on poor Jim who bet wrong? Aww, he a naughty boy.
Why, Mike, You were the one who brought up the Star Trek series. Capitalism was nonexistent in their own little universe. For a person who owns some stock, driven down by that famous oilman, Bumbling Bush, apparently I'm probably more capitalist than many on this board. apparently I am paying for my sins for being one. :–7
Jim Lincoln wrote: You have to remember money wasn't even used in the Federation of StarTrek fame, the nonsense of Capitalism was done away with in the future. In fact, Captain Kirk didn't marry the mother of his child. Marriage was also not very important during that mythical future. However, ---
The "nonsense of Capitalism"? Oh dear, Jim, have you gone over to the dark side of socialism? Perhaps you should move to New York, or any other failed State that dabbles in it.
You have to remember money wasn't even used in the Federation of StarTrek fame, the nonsense of Capitalism was done away with in the future. In fact, Captain Kirk didn't marry the mother of his child. Marriage was also not very important during that mythical future. However, I believe the creator of Startrek(s) was happily married until his death to Marjoe ... the actress who was a nurse and also the voice of the computer.
Jim Lincoln wrote: --- "...Married couples with children who live on one earner’s average income in Britain pay 73 per cent of the tax that a single person without children has to pay. This is a burden nearly 40 per cent higher than is typical in the developed world and 20 per cent higher than the average EU tax bill."
It's a burden for a single who earns a given income to pay almost 40% more tax than a family of at least 4 has to pay on the same income? Lets face it, taxes are never fair when arbitrary-ness is injected. Yet the single provides for one person, the family for minimum of four. To get a perspective on this, suppose the single earns 10000 quatloos. We have to assume a tax, so lets assume 2000 quatloos for the single. The family's tax would be 1460 quatloos on this income.
The single has 8000 quatloos left to provide for himself alone.
The family has 8540 quatloos to provide for minimum of 4.
Doesn't sound like much of a burden on the single, does it?
There are some things that the U.S. shouldn't follow the "Mother Country," in and that's the percentage of unwed mothers! According to this (note: rather pornographic) article in the Daily Mail, "The analysis, by the EU’s statistical arm Eurostat, comes after Britain’s tax and benefit system was revealed to be more heavily biased against traditional families than any other in the Western world.
Married couples with children who live on one earner’s average income in Britain pay 73 per cent of the tax that a single person without children has to pay. This is a burden nearly 40 per cent higher than is typical in the developed world and 20 per cent higher than the average EU tax bill." ---Single mother Britain: U.K. has most lone parents of any major European nation.
Dr. Joel Beeke | 1/4/2009
COMMENTS | 
apparently I am paying for my sins for being one. :–7
In fact, Captain Kirk didn't marry the mother of his child. 
