This is a very unique question, it's one I've only just recently begun considering. Based on what you know of society, education, and just general experience do you believe those who are poor deserve their fate. Are they less deserving or useful, an thus less important?

It would be easy to classify the poor as merely useless puppets of their prospective governments but do they have any importance?

Well that's my question, it's a serious one too. Please tell me your opinions.

Like almost everything else, .....some do, some don't.

Baron Max

Yes. The ruling 1%.

This is a very unique question
No it isn't. People have been debating this for centuries.

"Deserves" is a very relative term. I contend that me getting X by doing nothing while another person works hard to get X does not mean the person working hard deserves it.

That is why I find people that get a good education dumb as hell when they claim they deserve anything beyond the education they got. "I busted my ass in school so I deserve bla bla bla. . ."

Ethics are always debatable, but I would contend that ethically, all people deserve equal rights. All people have the right to have access to good food, water, and many things necessary for a healthy and well balanced life style. All people. Not just the few rich. No obligation. This is the right for all people. I have yet to see any proof that this cannot or should not be the case by all those idiots who claim that people are "obligated" to anything when obligation is the oppsite of freedom.

"Deserves" is a very relative term. I contend that me getting X by doing nothing while another person works hard to get X does not mean the person working hard deserves it.

Balderdash.
Why should one iota of anything anyone generates via their efforts be given to the likes of you ?

Your definition of "freedom" IS obligation. The obligation to provide for delusional gimps like you, who have created a dream-world in which their so-called "gifts" place them on some higher plane wherein they "deserve" a slice of the good life for no more than farting out some hackneyed vision of a "better world".

Complete, utter, and absolute nonsense.

people should get fair compensation for their contributions whatever they may be. For instance, those who work fulltime to support themselves should have wages to provide for their needs not nickel and dime them. Also, those who rely on others for production should pay fair wages. The rich get richer and the poor get poorer is unfair and not productive. Equality not in the strict literal sense is not a bullshit ideal but a necessary goal to attain for the health and productivity of a society. What people don't understand is, unfair disparity causes other problems in society leading from depression, stress, domestic violence, medical problems, and diminishing initiative when people feel they have little control over their lives or the system will always give you the short end of the stick.

Also, i've noticed in many jobs people are not working but backstabbing others or discriminating others from jobs and opportunity. If bs is what wins out, then society should not complain about the unemployed or 'lazy' who don't have jobs. I've experienced this myself, so I work for myself now. The corporations and jazz can hire all the assholes they want. If a society does not provide work for those who want to or they have to deal with harassment then it's their own fault if they lose employees and keep the ones who cause the problems.

Who gets to decide what the poor deserve, would be my question.

What do the children of the poor deserve?

If a culture decides to take public land out of availability, protect its watersheds and forests from destructive exploitation, require public obedience to a variety of laws and regulations benefitting mostly the rich and restricting mostly the poor, do the poor deserve compensation for the loss of opportunity and resource?

Who gets to decide what the poor deserve, would be my question.

What do the children of the poor deserve?

If a culture decides to take public land out of availability, protect its watersheds and forests from destructive exploitation, require public obedience to a variety of laws and regulations benefitting mostly the rich and restricting mostly the poor, do the poor deserve compensation for the loss of opportunity and resource?

that's a question of morals but realistically only if the rich gain from the productivity of the poor. If they are self-sustaining, maybe not.

It would be easy to classify the poor as merely useless puppets of their prospective governments but do they have any importance?

Wealth would be happiness. You could be worth a billion and yet be poor in life. Healthcare, education, food, and residence are advantages, but holding onto those can also be a disadvantage.

The importance of the poor would be measured by what you think is important. Are they people first or simply a tool of productivity? :shrug:

Not from birth.

What is this "deserve" you speak of? I do not comprehend.

What is this "deserve" you speak of? I do not comprehend.
forget that let's start with the poor first what's that actualy?

Like almost everything else, .....some do, some don't.

Baron Max

exactly.to use an (if i may say so myself) SUPERB analogy.

people who are fat because they eat lots of pies deserve to be fat.
people who are fat because they have a genetic disorder do not.

people who are fat because they have a genetic disorder do not.

A genetic disorder? You mean that a genetic disorder creates fat from nothing, from air? Nope, even people who have a "genetic disorder" are fat because they eat more food, more calories, than their bodies use. Thus, ....they deserve to be fat.

How many Darfur refugees are fat or obese? None, right? So if "genetic disorders" cause fatness, then surely there should be at least a few of 'em who are fat. Hmm, but there ain't, are there?

If you drink too much booze, you get drunk.
If you eat too much food, you get fat.
Seems perfectly sensible to me.

Baron Max

A genetic disorder? You mean that a genetic disorder creates fat from nothing, from air? Nope, even people who have a "genetic disorder" are fat because they eat more food, more calories, than their bodies use. Thus, ....they deserve to be fat.

How many Darfur refugees are fat or obese? None, right? So if "genetic disorders" cause fatness, then surely there should be at least a few of 'em who are fat. Hmm, but there ain't, are there?

If you drink too much booze, you get drunk.
If you eat too much food, you get fat.
Seems perfectly sensible to me.

Baron Max

havent been to dafur myself so i cant really say.

genetics definately play a part,some people are more susceptable to gaining weight.

the difference between this :
http://www.alcoholfueledfunnymen.com/Machinations/obese.JPG

and a normal person cant just be food.

^uhm..it is food and other unrealistic lifestyles. If that guy was in a country that didn't feed his ass chained to a bed, he wouldn't be a ton period no matter what his metabolism is. Who the hell is feeding that lazy fuk? Who the hell has the luxury of sitting in an apartment eating enough food for 20 people every day? Where is his income coming from? I bet you that his family members are supporting his ass, gets social security, and his family comes by everyday to cook and feed his ass.

It is within our power to completely eliminate poverty. That we don't should be a source of shame to all humanity.

He's not chained to the bed, but umm yea that's kinda way big. I'd say the best thought here is a fact, he grew up and likely had been dealing with this condition for some time. It wasn't some instant situation which gained strength but a slowly progressing one... he ate, he grew fatter, but he wasn't eating alot either... he'd continue eating, growing fatter, but still he's not doing anything. If they didn't feed him he'd die, there'd be no chance for his body to loose weight :L

If they didn't feed him, he'd die?? He has a whole grocery aisle attached to his body.

They need to drop him off in a desert with a beach umbrella and gatorade and pick him up a month later. He'll still be alive and much lighter.

Some people have poor self-control. If there wasn't so much access to easy greed and food, he couldn't eat. Therefore he couldn't get fat. Just like when you lock up a criminal in prison it's harder to get access to drugs, alcohol, children for pedophiles etc.

How can you say that :L There were fat people back in the medevil ages as far as I'm aware, they didn't have anything to eat!

Fat is not based on food intake, it's based on other things.

How can you say that :L There were fat people back in the medevil ages as far as I'm aware, they didn't have anything to eat!

They didn't have anything to eat???????

Fat is not based on food intake, it's based on other things.

So where do the calories come from that the body stores as fat? Air?

Baron Max

It is within our power to completely eliminate poverty. That we don't should be a source of shame to all humanity.

No, it isn't, Spider .....unless you FORCE people to give up some of their luxuries and wealth. And even you wouldn't want to force people to do something they didn't want, would you?

If everyone who could afford it gave $1 per day to feed the poor, no one on Earth would go hungry. But how many people do you think would do that?

Baron Max

If everyone who could afford it gave $1 per day to feed the poor, no one on Earth would go hungry. But how many people do you think would do that?

Baron Max

With all of the charities in play, why is there hunger?

Baron max:

As an obese person myself I do have input. I am quite active in a day and probably eat less than the average person. Still I am 400 lbs. Now true part of that is muscle form splitting and stacking firewood and my other chores, but a great deal is fat.

Well the answer has recently been discovered. As any biologist will tell you we have all sorts of intestinal flora and fauna living inside of us. Two in particular are of interest. FOr simplicity sake we will call them A and B. A is very inefficent at digesting food and gets very few calories form anything ingested. B is hyper efficent, it breaks down food rapidly and throughly gaining far more from it than it counter part A. The upshot is people who have higher levels of A can eat a ton of food and never gain and ounce. Unfortunately people with higher levels of B can gain weight on a 1800 calorie maintenance diet.

Now before you judge some one remember some factors in life are just beyond a persons control. There are people drunk after one beer. There are people who gain weaight on a healthy diet. There are people who will never make enough money no matter what they do and there are people who are obscenely rich for no reason.

Just like when you lock up a criminal in prison it's harder to get access to drugs, alcohol, .


you MUST be joking.

If they did something to become poor and/or refuse (I said "refuse") to get themselves out of the situation, then I suppose one can argue they deserve it.

If they simply cannot get out of the situation without a helping hand, no matter how hard they genuinely wish to change their situation, then I say certainly not.

If everyone who could afford it gave $1 per day to feed the poor, no one on Earth would go hungry. But how many people do you think would do that?

I would. Most likely I would give even more than that. But I think your figure is an overestimation. Maybe. I'll have to check on it.

With all of the charities in play, why is there hunger?

Because the money doesn't go to the poor and the hungry, it goes to the people who work for the charities! Have you seen their beautiful, luxurious offices and buildings?

Baron Max

Now before you judge some one remember some factors in life are just beyond a persons control.

Yep, there you go ...it's a matter of self-control.

All the other bullshit you posted was just that ...bullshit ...excuses.

Baron Max

it goes to the people who work for the charities! Have you seen their beautiful, luxurious offices and buildings?

maybe 60% or so (transport included) 15% get's lost underway or where never mend to work or be eaten, a other 15% goes to bribes, the rest proberly reaches it's destination and is traded in with local militia for kalasnikovs

different people have different meanings on being rich and poor and the poor grow a lot of resentment to the other poor. I believe the greatest assest of humanity is it's ability to self destruct.
note greatest assest doesnt mean something good

Your definition of "freedom" IS obligation. The obligation to provide for delusional gimps like you, who have created a dream-world in which their so-called "gifts" place them on some higher plane wherein they "deserve" a slice of the good life for no more than farting out some hackneyed vision of a "better world".

I really do wish that all these misanthropic arguments people put up would start considering reality. I mean, anyone who thinks that laboring for an exploitative system that intentionally seeks to hurt you and demands your allegiance, participation, and labor 24/7 is freedom needs to stop and think for a moment. It's nice to pick on the poor or the thinkers and dreamers in order to make yourself feel better. That's always the way it is with the bully attitude.

Take, for instance, some of the posts about the fat guy. I would go so far as to theorize that people need the poor, the statistically deviant, the depressed, the abused, the injured and broken and maimed. It's a hell of a lot more fun to hate them than it is to aim that poison where it belongs.

There are some people in this world who simply need someone and something to hate. That person or entity doesn't actually have to offend those people. All one must do is simply exist, and there are a host of people out there willing to hate for any stupid reason they can find. Compassion and rational consideration actually take less energy, but it's just not as fun, is it?

And yes, "deserves" is a subjective term. For instance, my daughter's mother prefers to spend time in bars than with our child. Her outlook is that the first requirement of a happy child is a happy mother. Therefore, my daughter "deserves" her mother's behavior. It's not a bad thing. It's all done for love. At least, to hear her tell it.

Mod Hat - Get it together ....


All the other bullshit you posted was just that ...bullshit ...excuses.

You know, Max, I need you to get it together, man. If you really want to believe that everything you disagree with is bullshit and excuses, fine. But at some point, I really need you to flesh out that argument.

Really, take a look around: I let a lot of crap go on around here. There are, however, a few posters--and you are one of them--who contribute nothing but crap. And I let that go on. Hell, I've heard loads about these "infraction points", but I have no idea what they are; I haven't issued any, and I don't plan to until directly ordered to use the system.

But I really need you to put some substance to your posts. Perhaps if you were actually funny, the perpetual comedy routine wouldn't seem so disruptive. But you're not, and the two fingers you just gave in your post cross the line. If you want to debate the validity of the science, fine; it pertains to the ethical outcome so it can stay here in this discussion. But if your best answer is "Bullshit", save your time, save the electricity, and save us all the indignity of witnessing your performance.

You've had a great run of vapidity. And you're as welcome in EM&J as anyone else. But I need substance in your posts. I'm running out of excuses for not dealing with you in my capacity as a moderator.

I very much believe in free speech. Please, please cease your relentless attempt to make that belief impractical. Free speech does not mean that your speech has no value. I don't care if it's a nickel or a ha'penny. Contribute something substantial please.

Of course, let me know if that's too much to ask; I'm certain I can work out a more satisfactory arrangement.

:cool:

...I really need you to flesh out that argument.
But I really need you to put some substance to your posts.
...and the two fingers you just gave in your post cross the line.
But I need substance in your posts.
I'm running out of excuses for not dealing with you in my capacity as a moderator.
Contribute something substantial please.

Of course, let me know if that's too much to ask; I'm certain I can work out a more satisfactory arrangement.

Yeah, that's too much to ask. Do whatever you think you must ...but don't just threaten and bluster ...if you think I'm doing something wrong according to the rules, then deal with it. Don't be a weak, fuckin' wimp!

Baron Max

There are reasons for the imbalance in society, unequal sharing of resources, unequal rights, unequal opportunity and lack of imput and respect of the individual. It is easy to tell what is wrong, look at history! Money is human energy, money is not what is important it is the energy and the proper use of it for the good of all the people. It is said that without the shift towards equal sharing in america there will be a civil war, as the times when brother fought against brother, I hope not.

There are reasons for the imbalance in society, unequal sharing of resources, unequal rights, unequal opportunity...

But some people work harder than others ...how can you call it equal justice to give some lazy bastard exactly what the hard worker gets? Is there no shared incentive in your ideal world? Or is it that we can all lie around on our ass and get all that we want equally?

It is said that without the shift towards equal sharing in america there will be a civil war, as the times when brother fought against brother,....

Interesting. I think it'll be just the opposite ...taking from the hard workers to give to lazy bastards is what's gonna' cause civil war. Just think, ...the lazy bastards won't want to start a war, they're too fuckin' lazy.

But when some people, mainly idealistic liberals, start trying to take money from the workers to give to the lazy bastards, they're gonna' start gettin' damned tired of it. That might lead to civil war ...not the way you suggest.

Baron Max

being poor or not gives different taste to life, more appreciation to the resources and life in general for the poor and more appreciation to the truth and power for the not poor. we should experience it all to feel the worl fully.

being poor or not gives different taste to life, more appreciation to the resources and life in general for the poor and more appreciation to the truth and power for the not poor. we should experience it all to feel the world fully.

What if we don't wan to? What if we'd just rather read about it in books rather than actually experience poverty and starvation?

By the way, would you hold to the same thinking if it was about killing people? Raping women? Stealing? Drug usage? Drunkeness? Nuclear bombings? Suicide bombings?

Baron Max

What if we don't wan to? What if we'd just rather read about it in books rather than actually experience poverty and starvation?

By the way, would you hold to the same thinking if it was about killing people? Raping women? Stealing? Drug usage? Drunkeness? Nuclear bombings? Suicide bombings?

Baron Max

we choose the path: the killers, the suicide bombers, tyrants....teachers, engineers, scientists

Interesting. I think it'll be just the opposite ...taking from the hard workers to give to lazy bastards is what's gonna' cause civil war. Just think, ...the lazy bastards won't want to start a war, they're too fuckin' lazy.

But when some people, mainly idealistic liberals, start trying to take money from the workers to give to the lazy bastards, they're gonna' start gettin' damned tired of it. That might lead to civil war ...not the way you suggest.

I find it interesting how those who are hostile toward the poor depend on the "lazy bastards" argument. Certainly there are lazy bastards out there. But what about the greedy bastards who take more than their share? Who buy influence and corrupt society, and cause more people to be poor? As long as we insist on weeping over the "lazy bastards", we'll never actually address solutions to poverty and its accompaniment difficulties.

The hard workers? Take one of your vaunted "hard workers", say a CEO who runs a clothing manufacturer. Now put him to work for a week or two in one of the sweatshops he pretends he doesn't finance. Since he's a "hard worker", and the poor are "lazy bastards", the CEO should do just fine. In fact, he should be able to outperform the "lazy bastards".

Even better, make him leave his wealth behind for that period, and ask him to subsist on the wages those "lazy bastards" get while working twelve to sixteen hour shifts. The lazy bastard is the guy at the top who thinks he deserves more because he has the power to bleed it out of others. Most poor, and even those not among the working poor, aren't "lazy bastards".

Relying on such hatred as the "lazy bastards" myth is just a way for the "hard workers" to be lazy. They want lots of money, and they think that by going to an office and inventing all sorts of silly rituals to follow they're working hard. And when those "hard workers" at the top do their jobs wrong, it's the "lazy bastards" busting their asses that lose their jobs.

Over the years, I've heard some outrageous things:

- A single mother who won't work sixty to eighty hours a week outside the home for insufficient wages is "lazy". (U.S. politics)
- The Reconstruction-era blacks who built stable businesses only to have them taken away by racist laws were "lazy". (Myth of Southern Reconstruction)
- The tribal slaves carrying their European masters around the Caribbean on their backs were "lazy". (Myth of Columbus, Colonization, &c.)
- People suffering disabilities are lazy. (Baron Max)

If the world were really so simple, Baron Max, if success and stability were simply matters of will and desire, if everything was a matter of simple choice, rich people would long be extinct.

We live in a society that needs poor people. Western society could not survive as it does without the support of a massive poverty class. We need them. If decency and justice aren't convincing arguments, then think of it as an investment. The "hard-working" rich invest money and resources in the "lazy bastards" who are poor, else the rich would have a hard time being rich. Without the "lazy" poor, the "hard-working" rich might have to carry their own luggage to the private jet before flying off to a "business meeting" complete with coke and hookers; without the "lazy" poor, the "hard-working" rich might have to get out of the sauna and clean their own toilets. Without the "lazy" poor, the "hard-working" rich might have to go fight their own wars, take care of their own children.

As long as we imagine the poor to be "lazy bastards", as long as pretend the "lazy bastards" straw man is the vital issue, we cannot make a serious attempt to deal with poverty and the social challenges associated with it.

If so many of the poor are lazy bastards, why do the rich hire them? Why should the rich not trim their own hedges, change their own tires, raise their own children?

I really do wish that all these misanthropic arguments people put up would start considering reality. I mean, anyone who thinks that laboring for an exploitative system that intentionally seeks to hurt you and demands your allegiance, participation, and labor 24/7 is freedom needs to stop and think for a moment. It's nice to pick on the poor or the thinkers and dreamers in order to make yourself feel better. That's always the way it is with the bully attitude.

In the case of the person I was responding to, I was taking into account the "reality" of his own boasts to the effect that he is fully capable of making a living, but has chosen to "screw the system" by wrangling himself a monthly gov't. check.
Can't say as I recall the specifics, if they were ever made plain, but it seems to me to be pretty hypocritical to yammer on about the alleged injustices of the system, yet somehow see past them to help yourself to the handouts it makes possible.
"Picking on him" doesn't really make me feel any better, but not knowing who he is or where he lives, I can't do what would - namely reporting his lazy ass to an agency which might investigate his case and throw him the hell off the dole !

Sorry, Killjoy. I just don't see it that way.

The point I read was, "I contend that me getting X by doing nothing while another person works hard to get X does not mean the person working hard deserves it."

Now, this whole thing may tread back to some other issue 'twixt you two. I suppose there is that. But he's right, especially when we read the rest of the post. One might be able to say that "He doesn't deserve that." But it is a difficult proposition to say, "I deserve this because ...."

Especially at that point, the word "deserves" becomes a very subjective standard.

Like Lixluke explained it,


That is why I find people that get a good education dumb as hell when they claim they deserve anything beyond the education they got. "I busted my ass in school so I deserve bla bla bla. . ."

I've heard folks talk like that, too. And I, too, think it's just ridiculous. It proves that "educated" does not mean "intelligent", but that's a separate issue.

In the meantime, no matter what's going on, demeaning human disability is low.

Yep, there you go ...it's a matter of self-control.

All the other bullshit you posted was just that ...bullshit ...excuses.

Baron Max

Oh, so scientific fact is Bullshit?

You know Baron, you are a damn hateful and ignorant man. What I posted is fact. The only reason you think it is bullshit is becuase then it shows you that maybe, just maybe in some cases that self control doesn't mean a damn thing in the end. You can have all the self control in the owrld and work yourself to the bone and in some situations all that means is you are a very controlled and weary poor person.

Now do the world a favor back up and look at your life and imagine what might have happened if a few things that went right had instead gone very wrong. It happens to millions of people everyday and yes some of then could pick themselves up and make it work, but at least as many are knocked down for the count through no fualt of their own.

Oh, so scientific fact is Bullshit?

You know Baron, you are a damn hateful and ignorant man. What I posted is fact.

Oh, I agree that some people lack the ability to control their own eating habits. But that's also true of many other kinds of lack of control ....murderers, theives, rapists, pedophiles, drug addicts, drunks, ...and the list goes on and on.

But the REASON that people are fat is because they eat too much. It has nothing to do with genes or genetic make up. If they did not eat so much, they wouldn't be fat. That's a scientific fact!!!!

What you're calling a "fact" is that some people lack control. The lack of control doesn't cause one to be fat!! Eating causes fat ...and that's a scientific fact. You're just making excuses, even if "scientific", for fat people being fat. All the "science" says is that you're too fuckin' weak to resist the food that you stuff into your mouth.

It happens to millions of people everyday and yes some of then could pick themselves up and make it work, but at least as many are knocked down for the count through no fualt of their own.

Those that can't get back up are weak individuals who don't deserve any sympathy from me or anyone else. If they're that weak, they should die off so as to prevent passing that genetic weakness to other generations. In the animal world, that's exactly what happens, and those that survive are the strong ...the weak die off.

Humans, on the other hand, whine and cry and get help from idiots ....and thus the genetic make-up of humans now has so many lousy, weak traits as to be completely weak and helpless, whiney and crying all the time because they don't get their own way. And they invent "science" to show that it's not their fault!!! Fuck 'em, they should all die if they're defective.

Baron Max

But the REASON that people are fat is because they eat too much. It has nothing to do with genes or genetic make up. If they did not eat so much, they wouldn't be fat. That's a scientific fact!!!!

Baron, do you know what a "sustenance diet" is?

What you're saying is that people are somehow lazy whiners if they don't starve themselves to death, or at least to other medical problems.

But why should you care? After all, you can always blame people in that condition for starving themselves.

Fuck 'em, they should all die if they're defective.

There is no real rule against Spartanistic savagery at this forum, but hatemongering doesn't make you look any better.

this is a difficult question wich "might" not have a true answer. maybe it does.

i dont know who is the judge of who is deserving of what prize for there deeds.

on one hand you could say the man who stuck with a 9-5 job working for peanuts his whole life deserves more than the lazy man who won the lottery.

or you could say the man working a 9-5 should have taken the risk to start his own buisness and escape the peanut pay of the rat race, he who dosent try wont succeed,


or maybe he couldent take the risk because of duties to his family incase he failed his own buisness so he stuck with the low paid job for steady low income,


maybe the young man who started his own buisness and made an empire had all the lucky breaks while others around him tried tried tried and failed.


there might have been a man who didnt want alot of money aslong as he had his friends and his family, he was rich in love and happyness but not in material wealth.

there might have been a man who was striving to become rich and he neglected his friends and family to persue buisness and wealth, in the end he succeeded and became rich, then he grew old and died with his money but without his friends and family.


the world can seem cruel sometimes, but there are rich people who might not seem deserving of that money, and poor people who might not seem deserving of there poverty, a poor person in london has a small amount of money and dosent own expensive things, he has a dingey abode and dosent eat the best of the many foods available here,

the poor man in africa has a dirt hut or deseised shack in a shanty town, he is starving every day just waiting to die of aids or starvation.


you could say the african could leave his shanty town and go and hunt some wild game or try to seek a better life elsewhere but he doesent try. or maybe he cant because of some reason.


we are human thats why, we are poor because we strive for better, look at the animal kingdom who is the poor lion and who is the rich lion? who is the poor elephant and who is the rich elephant etc etc,


think about it.


peace.

What you're saying is that people are somehow lazy whiners if they don't starve themselves to death,...

No, they're lazy whiners to whine about their fat, yet are too fuckin' weak to do anything about it. They'd rather whine so as to get people like you to enable them so they don't feel so bad about being so weak and fat!

There is no real rule against Spartanistic savagery at this forum, but hatemongering doesn't make you look any better.

You should make that a rule, then you could ban me forever. Please? Hell, make it a rule that no one can type "Baron Max" into the sciforums. Please?

Baron Max

Baron Max I've never seen you so agitated :o Anyway I think everyone has to really consider the situation. When you're just plain born with bad genes you can't change anything through willpower alone. They could ignore food all they like but it's honestly a sickness designed by man, you see food they buy in places is usually meant to make them more hungary, so in effect they'll buy more food. If they change their eating habits to things like vegetables they'd soon find they don't want as much, vegetables fill you :-Z

Now as for being weak... Baron is right in some respect. Animals will die off if they're unable to survive, and while this isn't exactly bad we are humans, different than animals in many ways. It's a responsibility to take care of eachother not only in a family but also in society. Each person is unique, and those weaknesses they possess can help make us strong. By dealing with the problems of others we learn to prevent them in our society, thus increasing its chances to live on.

This is what it means to live now.

Each person is unique, and those weaknesses they possess can help make us strong. By dealing with the problems of others we learn to prevent them in our society, thus increasing its chances to live on.

No! What's happening is that we've prevented natural selection to weed out the weak and infirmed, thus subjecting the species with weakness and infirmity that's been allowed to propagate ...no, even worse, we've ENCOURAGED weakness and infirmity to flourish in our species.

If we keep it up at the present rate, there'll be only a few strong individuals to take care of the billions of weak and sick and infirmed and helpless. Is that what you want for your specie? From your post, it seems that you're actually proud of that weakness and sickness growing in your specie.

Baron Max

i agree with alot of what baron is saying but not the way he is saying it, :)


natural selection is true, the weak shall perish where the strong survive, that includes strong minded as well as strong bodied, a warrior will live where a peasant shall die. etc

a human society as a whole with human rights, we protect the weak from harm and they hinder the society combined. because if nature were to take its course without man made laws the weak would die. it sounds cruel to the "humane" ear but it is life, it is nature.

peace,

Oh, I agree that some people lack the ability to control their own eating habits. But that's also true of many other kinds of lack of control ....murderers, theives, rapists, pedophiles, drug addicts, drunks, ...and the list goes on and on.

So you are comparing people with an over abundance of a certain bacteria with rapist, pedophiles, drug addicts and so on. You know I used to think you had a refreshing view point but obviously your just a moron.

But the REASON that people are fat is because they eat too much. It has nothing to do with genes or genetic make up. If they did not eat so much, they wouldn't be fat. That's a scientific fact!!!!

What you're calling a "fact" is that some people lack control. The lack of control doesn't cause one to be fat!! Eating causes fat ...and that's a scientific fact. You're just making excuses, even if "scientific", for fat people being fat. All the "science" says is that you're too fuckin' weak to resist the food that you stuff into your mouth.

Did you even read what I posted moron. I posted about research that shows why some people on restricted food intake and exercise routines. These are peaople who are NOT over eating and in some cases would be under eating. G0o back and read the post again and this time READ.


Those that can't get back up are weak individuals who don't deserve any sympathy from me or anyone else. If they're that weak, they should die off so as to prevent passing that genetic weakness to other generations. In the animal world, that's exactly what happens, and those that survive are the strong ...the weak die off.

Actually if you think about it they are not weak, not even in the slightest. They get more calories from the same amount of food. They are the ultimate survivors. Peoples with the abundance of the one type of bacteria will survive famines and droughts and even interstellar travel better. It's not a weakness, except to people like you.

So you are comparing people with an over abundance of a certain bacteria with rapist, pedophiles, drug addicts and so on.

I was comparing the lack of self-control in those groups .....not making a comparison of the people. Fat people have no self-control, pedophiles have no self-control, drug addicts have no self control, ......get it now?

You weigh some 400 lbs. You consider yourself obese. Do you want to weigh 400 lbs? If not, then you have no self-control ....just like those others.

Peoples with the abundance of the one type of bacteria will survive famines and droughts and even interstellar travel better. It's not a weakness, except to people like you.

Then you and other fat asses should be happy as pigs in shit on a hot Texas day. Yet here you are making excuses for being fat. You should be loudly proclaiming your superiority, not making excuses. The government should reverse their stance on obesity and try to make even more people fat and obese instead of trying to curb the trend.

Why aren't you proud of your fatness and obesity????

Baron Max

Baron Max, what about people with depression?

Baron Max, what about people with depression?

I think "depression" is just another form of weakness and the inability to control ones own emotions. Yeah, it's a flaw, a weakness, ...that should have been "naturally selected" OUT of the human race.

Baron Max

I'm dissapointed in ya, I gots depression an it hard to live with :( You should be nicer to people :z

I was comparing the lack of self-control in those groups .....not making a comparison of the people. Fat people have no self-control, pedophiles have no self-control, drug addicts have no self control, ......get it now?

You weigh some 400 lbs. You consider yourself obese. Do you want to weigh 400 lbs? If not, then you have no self-control ....just like those others.


Are you really this kind of moron all the time. I'll tell you what, cut back to a 1200 calorie diet and stay there for a year then talk to me about self control. Oh and while you are doing it split a chord of whood every day and walk a mile. And this is on top of everything else you have to do. Now add to that wear a backpack that has forty pounds of books in it. Every week add three pounds of books. That is how some people exist everyday of their lives.

I'm not saying all fat people are like this, but a good deal of them are. They diet religiously, they count their calories, they increase their activity and they behave with more self control than should be humanly possible. Then along comes a bit of research that tells them that maybe, just maybe they can breathe a little easier. They can understand why they do all the things they are supposed to do and yet they keep the weight or gain more.

Now if you can't understand this then maybe you should just quit trying to think. After all it is obviously not your strong suit.


Then you and other fat asses should be happy as pigs in shit on a hot Texas day. Yet here you are making excuses for being fat. You should be loudly proclaiming your superiority, not making excuses. The government should reverse their stance on obesity and try to make even more people fat and obese instead of trying to curb the trend.

Why aren't you proud of your fatness and obesity????

Baron Max


Okay, first of all you misunderstood everthing I said, but then again I expect to understand you'd actually have to have a working braincell or three. I am saying NOT ALL CASES OF OBESITY ARE THE RESULT OF LACK OF CONTROL. Some are and everyone will admit that, I will even go so far as to say most are. But lumping everyon in that catecory is a lot like lumping you with most jerks, it does diservice to the other jerks.

So back you empty head up and shut up. It is patently obvious to those with owrking brains that yours roitted away, if you had one.

They can understand why they do all the things they are supposed to do and yet they keep the weight or gain more.

SCIENTIFIC FACT: People gain weight, fat, because they take in more calories than they use.

I am saying NOT ALL CASES OF OBESITY ARE THE RESULT OF LACK OF CONTROL.

Well, if someone else forces the food down the fat-ass' throat, then I guess I'd have to excuse that one fat-ass. All other cases, however, are due to lack of self-control. You can make up all of the excuses that you wish, but in the end, it's just that ....excuses for the lack of self-control. It's exactly the same with alcoholics ...they lack self-control.

Baron Max

SCIENTIFIC FACT: People gain weight, fat, because they take in more calories than they use.
Yep



Well, if someone else forces the food down the fat-ass' throat, then I guess I'd have to excuse that one fat-ass. All other cases, however, are due to lack of self-control. You can make up all of the excuses that you wish, but in the end, it's just that ....excuses for the lack of self-control. It's exactly the same with alcoholics ...they lack self-control.

Baron Max

Nope

A genetic disorder? You mean that a genetic disorder creates fat from nothing, from air? Nope, even people who have a "genetic disorder" are fat because they eat more food, more calories, than their bodies use. Thus, ....they deserve to be fat.

How many Darfur refugees are fat or obese? None, right? So if "genetic disorders" cause fatness, then surely there should be at least a few of 'em who are fat. Hmm, but there ain't, are there?

If you drink too much booze, you get drunk.
If you eat too much food, you get fat.
Seems perfectly sensible to me.

Baron Max

the people of Sudan and most other countries are suffereing from civil strife, lack of food, sanitation etc.

There is next to no obeste people in Africa simply because THERE IS NO FOOD. In order for a genetic disorder to fulfill itself, there has to be food. What about the psychological illnesses where people simply eat on impulse or eat because they are depressed.

It is impossible to correlate one person's food supply with a genetic eating disorder

What about the psychological illnesses where people simply eat on impulse or eat because they are depressed.

They lack self-control. All those psycho-babble things are just excuses.

Fat people are fat because they eat too much food. Why they eat too much food might be open to debate, but I doubt it. I think it's simply a lack of self-control.

Baron Max

Depression is not good, I try hard to live but always want to not :(

that's the key word. "Self Control". Do you think it's possible for people to have mental disorders that hinder their ability to maintain self control?

Dont forget there are other sources of weight gain. Most antispychotic medication lowers peoples' metabolism rates which brings to another reason:

Not everybody has the same metabolism rate. Most of us are in the middle. There are some people who have a very very good motabolism rate and there are the unfortunate ones who have a very poor motabolism rate. Sure you can tell them not to eat so much but that wont do anything. They have to eat the same as everyone else otherwise they will not get the nutrients they need.

Also diabetics have a hard time because they are always in constant battle with maintaining a proper glucose level. where does that come from? Food

man oh man I love debates

that's the key word. "Self Control". Do you think it's possible for people to have mental disorders that hinder their ability to maintain self control?

Mental disorders? Hmm, that's the same thing as "fucked up in the head", "crazy", "insane", "abnormal", "sick-in-the-head", and other such terms, right?

Not everybody has the same metabolism rate.

Then they shouldn't eat so much if they don't want to gain all that fat! The metabolic rate doesn't create calories from nothing, ya' know?

Fat people eat too much. What's so fuckin' hard to understand about that???

Diabetes? I read an article not too long ago that basically said that a diabetic wouldn't have any problems if they ate the right kinds of food.

Baron Max

Yes, the fat eat to much. I still say mental problems are different ":L

Yes, the fat eat to much. I still say mental problems are different ":L

I don't understand how being born poor can be compared to:

a. someone with a metabolic condition that may cause them to digest food much more slowly than a person with a "normal" metabolism.

and

b. someone with an imbalance of serotonin, or dopamine, or some other neurotransmitter within the body.

I mean seriously, this thread is typical in that it's impossible to follow because of the shrill name calling, but is anybody actually suggesting that a child has any control of the economic status they are born into?

There's no shame in being poor. There is shame in staying that way.

This is a very unique question, it's one I've only just recently begun considering. Based on what you know of society, education, and just general experience do you believe those who are poor deserve their fate. Are they less deserving or useful, an thus less important?

It would be easy to classify the poor as merely useless puppets of their prospective governments but do they have any importance?

Well that's my question, it's a serious one too. Please tell me your opinions.
Do those poor people have POTENTIAL. If they do, then it is obviously worthwhile saving them from their poverty, don't you think!?

Regardless, nobody deserves poverty.

well you are still here :)

Who? Me? :confused:

..., but is anybody actually suggesting that a child has any control of the economic status they are born into?

No. But as soon as they grow up some, they can work to get out of poverty, thus .....they won't deserve it.

There's no shame in being poor. There is shame in staying that way.

No, I don't think there's shame in being poor either way ....if that's what they want to be and they're willing to accept the conditions.

The shame in being poor is asking, expecting others to give you food, housing, clothing, etc, without them having to work for it. That's the shame of poverty!

Baron Max

Regardless, nobody deserves poverty.

You do realize, don't you, that there are many who are perfectly happy living in poverty??? Yes, TS, there are .....and if you deny it, then you don't know much about the world at large.

Baron Max

No, They are not.

If there is such a thing as "deserving" to be poor, the only problem is that poverty is denied to many of the most deserving, and awarded to many who don't deserve it in the least.

But life, as the rich man once said, isn't fair.

Very true....

Balderdash.
Why should one iota of anything anyone generates via their efforts be given to the likes of you ?

Your definition of "freedom" IS obligation. The obligation to provide for delusional gimps like you, who have created a dream-world in which their so-called "gifts" place them on some higher plane wherein they "deserve" a slice of the good life for no more than farting out some hackneyed vision of a "better world".

Complete, utter, and absolute nonsense.
You sound just like those slaves last century that cussed people out for telling them that slavery should be abolished.

Try coming up with a decent argument because your argument so far is garbo.

Freedom is the opposte of obligation. Try proving that wrong. What you are proclaiming is that it is impossible for everybody to be free. Proof?

What are the necessities of life? What is wealth? Fat people aside, is poverty more of a state where there is no hope?

Proof?
My question to you. How do we keep the world going with everybody twiddlin' their thumbs and fuh-fuh-fornicatin' all the live long day ?
hmmm... that sounds prety good, actually. Just don't tell me it's that old Alvin Lee cliche -
Tax the rich...
Feed the poor.
'Til there are no...
Rich no more...
'Cos that ain't never gonna work unless you plan on doin' some shootin'...

Gork us up some of the Gospel according to Bozotsky~Land, brutha !
:rolleyes:

i'm ready to sign up an' quit mah day job !!
Ah wants tuh be FREE !

I say, I say, I say - AMEN !!!

What are the necessities of life? What is wealth? Fat people aside, is poverty more of a state where there is no hope?

What'd Jesus say about it?

My question to you. How do we keep the world going with everybody twiddlin' their thumbs and fuh-fuh-fornicatin' all the live long day ?
hmmm... that sounds prety good, actually. Just don't tell me it's that old Alvin Lee cliche -
Tax the rich...
Feed the poor.
'Til there are no...
Rich no more...
'Cos that ain't never gonna work unless you plan on doin' some shootin'...

Gork us up some of the Gospel according to Bozotsky~Land, brutha !
:rolleyes:

i'm ready to sign up an' quit mah day job !!
Ah wants tuh be FREE !

I say, I say, I say - AMEN !!!
You do not even know what you are talking about. Where did I say anybody is sitting there? You cannot even prove it. You probably would say that slavery should not be abolished.
Basicaly you are claiming that people should not be free to do what they want. Yoou probably claim that there is no such thing as freedom. Yet nowhere in sight do youm provide any proof to your false assertions. So sad for you.

You do not even know what you are talking about. Where did I say anybody is sitting there? You cannot even prove it.
You're the one who said nobody wants to work, and that nobody should have to work.

So what happens when nobody does ?

DESTROY AND BE FREE !!!

;)

No. You were the one that claims that poor people should be forced into labor for the rich. And that freedom is an obligation. Get real. You have no proof of any of this.