American Thinker: Aristotle's Warning
Printable View
Excellent...many would do well to read this.
I like the picture of democracy painted by Aristotle, however, I think comparing that to modern day America is like comparing apples and oranges.
I agree that although we are "all born equally free" that there are some who are more skilled and talented, and deserving than others. And there in lies my issue with what I see these days.
There once was a time when a skilled craftsman could be recognized for the quality of work, respected for the time and education it took to become that skilled, and be paid accordingly. Those skilled craftsman have been bought out by big corporations, those precious goods are now machine made, and the days of skilled machine operators seem to be numbered.
Those skilled craftsmen, talented individuals, and deep thinkers are now left to be hired by big company's like Target, Kmart, and Walmart. They are under paid, over worked, mistreated, and rarely appreciated by patrons or upper management alike.
1% OF THE U.S. POPULATION CONTROL MORE WEALTH THEN THE LOWER 99%, and guess what, they aren't sharing it with us. In fact, it would seem they are pulling the wool over our eyes so they can continue to be greedy pigs.
Although the beginning of the health care reform will be a bit shaking, and believe me, I'm not thrilled with the idea of being penalized for not having health coverage, but the reform does one thing in nothing else. IT TAKES SOME POWER AWAY FROM SOME OF THOSE GREEDY PEOPLE, namely PHARMACEUTICAL/ MEDICAL COMPANIES. Rather then fighting to get their services and benefits, they will have to work for our business.
My belief is that Obama is taking control of the reigns, snatching them from greedy out stretched palms, and in tern passing them down to us, the every day person.
Change can be scary, but it can be very positive as well. DO YOU SEE A PROBLEM WITH A PERSON NOT BEING DENIED HEALTH COVERAGE IF THEY HAVE A PRE- EXISTING CONDITION? IS THERE SOMETHING WRONG WITH NOT BEING DROPPED FROM YOUR HEALTH PLAN IF YOU DEVELOP A CONDITION? WOULD YOU BE UPSET IF YOUR BUSINESS HAD TO PROVIDE YOU WITH HEALTH COVERAGE? HOW ABOUT 50% OF THOSE NAME BRAND DRUGS YOU TAKE TO BE HEALTHY? Those all sound like good things to me.
So you disagree with Aristotle because the wealth has shifted from skilled craftsmen to skilled businessmen? And if that's what you meant, how does that invalidate Aristotle's observations?Quote:
Originally Posted by freyguy
"In democracies the rich should be spared. Not only should their estates be safe from the threat of redistribution: the produce of the estates should be equally secure; and the practice of sharing it out, which has insensibly developed under some constitutions, should not be allowed."
"Demagogues are always dividing the city into two, and waging war against the rich. Their proper policy is the very reverse: they should always profess to be speaking in defense of the rich."
I'm not sure I understand why one or the other "skills" makes a difference. Reasonable to assume that at one time those craftsmen you admire had underlings with talent who were overlooked and abused too.
You are so wrong Scott. The rich should support us all, cradle to grave. Why should I even strive for a better life when there is the idle rich who can pay for all my needs. This is why we need government, to force the greedy rich bastards to pay their fare share...so the rest of us don't have to.
Working and paying your own way is so passe, don't you know? The nerve of some people! Not even willing to wipe my ass after a good sh!t:rant:
I wasn't speaking of businessmen. The guy who runs my local deli. I'm referring to the skilled liars, con artists and thieves we now call businessmen. On a daily basis we are lied to and deceived so we will empty our wallets and fill the pockets of someone else. Bernie Madoff was called a businessman until he got caught, right?
"spare the rich." that sounds like something a rich person would say. What it boils down to is that I'm not alright with 1% of the population having that much political and financial control over 99%. It just doesn't seem right. As statistics would have it, I'm sure I'm among many members of SRP who fall into that 99%.
What we're talking about is redistribution of wealth. Personally I'm ok with getting a bigger piece of the pie. I think peoples fears and concerns could be summed up in the saying "too many chiefs and not enough indians". Well we trusted our money and well being to a very select group of chiefs, played good little indians, and we've seen how poorly that worked out. If we each got a bigger cut, and acted intelligently and responsibly, considering the good of the "we" instead of the "I" then spreading the wealth around might not be such a bad idea, IMHO.
Then again, we have warnings on our coffee cups that read "caution, maybe hot" and have to be reminded to refrigerate milk and orange juice via the labels. I love the U.S of A. but maybe I'm getting ahead of myself with all of this.
Wow!! You don't trust those rich lying bastards but trust our government (made up of some of the richest lying bastards ) to take care of our health..and not even once thinking of picking our pockets.Quote:
Originally Posted by freyguy
My definition of intelligent and responsible are different than yours; how can we reconcile our differences intelligently or responsibly when we can't even come to a common meaning for the terms?Quote:
Originally Posted by freyguy
Moreover, there are already places like this that exist. If you so choose, you can even live under the power of an economic system that redistributes wealth.Quote:
Originally Posted by freyguy
Quote:
Originally Posted by JMS
I don't agree that the rich should pay our way. I'm all for striving for a better life, hence the reason I work three jobs 6 days a week, and volunteer on the 7th day for fun and my own fulfillment. I have a great distaste for people who mooch off of the hard working people of our country, but again that has nothing to do with what I was talking about. I'm talking about mooching off of the CEO's who sip age scotch and smoke cigars in their office, while thousands of the little people like you and me are fed B.S. about how hard work and strong effort could have us sitting in the same position, while being paid so little, a single mother can't feed her child. Have you ever run into the glass ceiling? Do you think Joe Shmoe working the register will ever see the inside of that corporate office? Even if he managed to start climbing the ladder, he'll only get so far before that nice, well paying job is handed off to the less deserving, cousin's, brothers, uncle's, sister who is less qualified. Ever have that experience?Quote:
Originally Posted by JMS
My pocket has already been picked. There's little doubt that both sides are lying cheats, so at the end of the day, yes, I will take the lying cheat who tells me something I like to hear. Because maybe, just maybe, part of what they said is true. and if nothing is true, at least I can go back to pretending.
now as a final thought... I general avoid political conversation, simply because no matter what your beliefs, or what you know, or think you know, no one knows what's going to happen, and our say in the matter very rarely counts for anything. The choice are made by some rich bastard on one side of the fence or the other. I.E. When the financial bail out was first proposed, we the people actually stood up and said no, and in a strange twist of fate, our cries were heard and the proposition was shot down. The next day, someone had found a back door loop hole, and managed to over turn the decision.
So with that being said, I mean no harm, nor do I mean to offend anyone or stir up arguments. I think it's best to remember why we're all here... for the LOVE OF STRAIGHT RAZORS.
Wow, I guess I shouldn't be surprised to hear the old, "if you don't like us, leave" response. What a cop out. I was born and raised in the U.S.A. A proud american who believes in what the star spangled banner represents. Who believes we have begun to lose sight of what our flag was made to stand for all those years ago. Our nation was founded by a bunch of loud mouth, argumentative, rebels like me, who thought there was more to be had then the status que offered. Our greatness as a nation was achieved by a complete upheaval of what "worked" and the nation was reborn in a likeness we saw fit. I believe that is what is happening today.Quote:
Originally Posted by Spect
Why wouldn't I leave America, cause I'm American. It is in my blood, in our history to stand up and argue for what we believe in.
Normally I avoid these threads...
What's wrong with sipping scotch or smoking cigars?Quote:
Originally Posted by freyguy
The idea that the owners of a company are robbing the employees is wrong. No one is forcing people to work for a company. People are willing to work for the pay. If they weren't, the company would have to pay more. Is that wrong? If you believe it is, then you should sell me the best razor in your collection for $5. It is the same economic principle.
CEOs get paid what they do, because their companies make a lot of money off of decisions they make. Granted, there have been some recent examples of poor CEOs, but I could also show you examples of union workers that should be fired for basically stealing a paycheck from the company. You can't make broad generalizations from looking at a few examples.
You couldn't convince me for a second that Jack Welch wasn't worth his salary. You'll never convince me that Stan Gadek isn't worth his.
I am not a CEO, far from it in fact. But, I don't get upset with someone that does better than I do.
HNSB, our freyguy assumes an awful lot. For instance, he doesn't realize he is speaking with a man ( me ) who spends 10 to 20 dollars on a 25 oz bottle of beer on a semi daily basis and may spend as much as 200 dollars on a knife every 60 or so days. This same man had trouble paying for his own way in life not even 10 to 11 years ago.
I didn't say "if you don't like us, leave". It's not a cop out to think two mutually exclusive views of economics need to occur in the same geography. What if states tried to leave the union over this issue?Quote:
Originally Posted by freyguy
If you look at world polices, people advocating what you are, they aren't in the minority - they aren't a patriotic-rebels; they are the new status que!
As I see it as an outsider, greed and its consequences are the main problem in American society.Quote:
Originally Posted by freyguy
Way I see it, the new health care reform does not take away ENOUGH of the power of pharmaceutical & medical companies. I think this means that healthcare will continue on being more expensive than everywhere else on the globe.
Good luck to you all.
Oh my. I take it none of you have ever read Aristotle for yourselves?
Aristotle...wow. Using Aristotle as an example for modern democracy...breath taking. This guy knows his audience, eh?
Aristotle was most decidedly AGAINST democracies. His favorite form of government was an Aristocracy...he equated social status with human value. A slave in Athens was by definition without human worth, for a truly worthy human could never become a slave. Social stratification as a definition of human value...Aristocracy. So, you know that government that our sainted founding fathers, those guys who shed their blood to feed the tree of liberty, founded? That is an EVIL form of government. They were traitors to a much nobler form of government...an aristocracy.
By agreeing with this article, gentlemen, you deny freedom, liberty, and equality: you do, in fact, align yourselves with the traditions that are antithetical to the founding of the United States, and were so utterly abhorrent to the founding fathers that many of you so revere. Aristocracy, the idea of inherent born nobility and inequality, and the class stratification (and yes, even slavery) that it entails.
Throwing Ayn Rand into the mix clearly tells us, this article is pure apologetics for a new aristocracy, where "wealth" has replaced "birth" as the measure of human value...
Repugnant. Utterly repugnant.
I don't see how that connection is made with Ayn Rand.Quote:
Originally Posted by JimR
Most of the "villians" in her work are extremely wealthy people.
She places value on the mind, not wealth. The mind is merely a means to wealth.
Her work makes it very clear that she was opposed to unearned wealth.
All this is very nice in principle but I'm sorry, that's just not how things work in the real world.Quote:
Originally Posted by HNSB
It's true that no one is forcing people to work for a given company. However, often people don't have a choice, because they need the income and there are no better-pay alternatives for them.
:rofl2::rofl2::rofl2:Quote:
Originally Posted by JMS
Kinda like assuming that everyone in favor of health care reform is a non-working lazy citizen looking for a free ride?
Quote:
Originally Posted by JMS
Did you make that assumption? I know I didn't.Quote:
Originally Posted by commiecat
You're right. The kid behind the counter at McDonalds should get paid $120,000 a year. McDonald's is a multi-billion dollar corporation. They can afford it.Quote:
Originally Posted by decraew
(this is EXACTLY what you're saying, just an extreme example...)
At what point did a company become slave to the employee? Companies don't have an obligation to ensure their employees can make a living off of the salary. They have a job available and offer a salary. Take it or leave it.
If the employee wants more, they should find a way to EARN more. It's not a matter of need, it's a matter of value.
My employer doesn't give half a crap about whether or not I need more money (or whether they are giving me more than I need). I am paid based upon the value of the service that I provide.
I worked my ass off to get from living below the poverty level to where I'm at. I guess I don't have a lot of sympathy for people that want more but aren't willing to work for it.
You'll note that I've said nothing about the healthcare thing. I don't really care about it.
I just get really torqued off when it comes up that every company in America is screwing their employees. That is absolutely not true. The thing that a lot of people miss is that need never justifies a salary. Value does.
You are trading a rich bastard that provides the opportunity to improve your life for a rich bastard that provides nothing but being the broker of your personal wealth to be destributed to another individual.
There is no moral imparitive that anyone supply the needs of anyone else. Even if they stole it. That is why a nation has laws. To identify theives and remove them from society.
Please tell me at what point of misery will you say "Hey, quit taking my Budwieser and Camel Cigarettes.", since you don't want anybody sipping Scotch and smoking a cigar. There is always somebody that has more and somebody that has less than you. I don't need for the people that have 1% of the wealth to give it to me. In a free society, I can go earn it back from them. Just get the hell out of my way.
But then, that would not be fair to people that are disadvantaged and not able to earn it back, right? So for that, we need a police state (IRS) to take that money and give it to them. Minus a surcharge of course. In fact most of it. Like 90%.
So if the Govenment is going to protect us from the evil rich, who is going to protect us from them?
You're right JMS...I don't know what got into me...retired from one career and am half-way through another...how stupid of me! I coulda gotten my education paid for...remainded a student for years by changing majors, and then going on for a masters or whatever it took to keep the funding going; if researched and applied for properly, coulda had my housing/rent/mortgage partially or totallly paid; then energy assistance to help with my utilities...of course after seeing what food stamp users have in their cart at the store, I was a fool there too...they always buy the best I've noticed.
The finding someone to wipe your a$$ part is a problem, but, I bet if you went about it correctly...did a little research, there has gotta be a government program somewhere that you could find funding for to have a bidet installed in your bathroom...then we wouldn't need anybody to wipe our a$$...I can ge behind all this!!!
It's pointless to get into the ownership/workforce debate. It's a symbiotic relationship. Both sides get upset with each other in probably every industry. Should you get paid according to your work ethic, or should your work ethic reflect what you get paid?Quote:
Originally Posted by HNSB
If you used to be below the poverty level then you should remember what it's like. Just because you and others in this thread -- myself included -- worked hard to get to where we're at now doesn't mean that everyone can with the same amount of work. Maybe others are currently working hard to get beyond poverty but have even more trouble in the recent economic conditions. Maybe they have pre-existing conditions or learning/physical disabilities. Maybe they have had other events in their lives that have put more strain on them financially than what we had. You can't make your life the template by which every other citizen can and should follow.
There's nothing wrong with scotch and cigars. As a matter of fact, I quite like both. There problem is that despite the few good CEOs who can be mentioned, many of them are greedy cheats, who would see their employees starve while they get fat on the hog. I'll step foot on your side of the arguement for a moment and say that a CEO should get paid more then his underlings. Despite the fact that he sits on his butt in a nice office, while people break their backs with physical labor to bring in revenue for his company, he is more educated, and better prepared to make intellegent decisions for the company. BUT how does that constitue him making an anual salary of $250 million + while his best, hardest working employee in the store makes only $30,000; at best.Quote:
Originally Posted by HNSB
Are we forced to work in these stores, for these greedy CEOs, technically no. However, when you have a family to feed, and your college education can't get you anything better a minimum wage job at kmart, are you going to see your family starve out of pride?
I'm not sure what selling you my best razor for $5 has to do with the conversation about CEOs sharing their money, but it brings up another good example. Let's look at a small group of SRP members, say 5, all with a collection of razors, some better then others. If I up and decide to sell my best razor to member 1 for $5, he can then sell his best razor to member 2 for $5. And round and round the cycle goes, and guess what? all 5 SRP members have just shared their best razors, and no one has broken the bank. Now if one of those members at some point decided they wouldn't sell the razor for any less then $100 the circle is broken, and the movement of razors comes to a halt. We are now in razor dead lock. One person has the best razor, and the rest have average razors. The lesson: when money moves freely from hand to hand, we all get to share the wealth, enjoying it's benefits, but when one person stops sharing, you develop all these negative things... want, envy, greed, murder, all because someone couldn't pass the buck.
Well JMS, you make an interesting assumtion yourself, because you see, you and I are not so different. A year ago, I was barely able to afford to buy myself lunch. Today, I can up and drop $250 on an external harddrive, or $130 on a beat up razor just because I like the way it looks. Nevertheless, I don't see what that has to do with the conversation. We're not talking about people like you and I. No matter how many $200 dollar knives, or external hard drives we could afford to buy in a year, we are still in that bottom 99% of that wealth distribution. The top 1% can buy a few $3,000 bottles of champaign with dinner, or a $250,000 Katana for his sword collect. That is the kind of wealth which needs to be redistributed.Quote:
Originally Posted by JMS
Thank you. Finally some people have stepped up and joined my side of this discussion. And your absolutely correct. Humans are condemned to choose, however, when your choice is a homeless family, or an underpaid, over worked position an ungreatful greedy CEO, the crappy job may not look great, but his necessaryQuote:
Originally Posted by decraew
Have you ever thought that if an employee wasn't struggling to make ends meet, didn't have to work 3 jobs just put a meager meal on his plate, that this employee might actually come into work and do a better job? What ever happened to the saying "a happy worker is a good worker" Granted, you don't just want to throw money at someone who may not become a better employee as a result, however, many companies will either string employees along for years promising raises and promotions, only to hire some young person who will do the same job for less money.Quote:
Originally Posted by HNSB
I had to work my ass off to be where I am, and will likely continue to work my ass off, just cause thats the kind of man I am, but at some point you have to sit back and wonder "isn't there a better way?" wouldn't your ideal job strive to keep/improve you as an employee? Wouldn't you like to be appreciated for your work?
The amount of money that 1% controls, would be more then enough for all of us to have our case of Miller and pack of smokes. Have you ever really thought about what a billion dollars can buy. How many bottles of beer or packs of cigarettes could be afforded with $1,000,000,000.00. Look at all those zero's.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alembic
Here's the real issue guys. This country has always been controlled by rich people and corporations. Even back in the 1800s. What has set us apart from most other countries is that in the U.S there was this realization that as long as the average working stiff had enough money to buy a house, a new car every few years and take his family on vacation and have a few toys he was happy. He didn't care what the CEO of some corporation made or how the private sector controlled the Govt.
However that is all changing and it will change much more as the standard of living in this country continues to deteriorate for the masses and as that happens people will be more interested in what others have that they don't and that breeds social unrest and big problems for the future of this country until our debtors stroll in and take over.
Sorry for not knowing how is it there, but in EU there are minimum wages that companies must pay to their workers. It is not much; much less than anyone could earn a living for his family, but nevertheless: it is not based on some value that employee only would claim.Quote:
Originally Posted by HNSB
In here it is not the question of taking away from the rich guys. They can earn as much as they ever can, but they still have to make sure they pay at least that minimum wage to their workers.
A company where not only high managers but workers as well feel that their work is respected usually does better job than those who give no half crap about their workers.
To be honest getting a minimum wage is very rare here, usually only students who work part time get paid the minimum.
=freyguy;566427]
If someone had given you a check at that time, so you could afford lunch, would you still have had the drive to try and better your circumstances, or would it have made it a little easier to stay where you were? IME, as soon as someone gets comfortable there is no longer the same drive to propel them further, why would there be, they are comfortable.[Quote:
A year ago, I was barely able to afford to buy myself lunch. Today, I can up and drop $250 on an external harddrive, or $130 on a beat up razor just because I like the way it looks.
In the US you are more than likely talking about people that started the same as us, little guys. Steve Jobs started Apple in his garage, now he employs thousands and thousands of people, oh, and makes loads of money. John Hunstman had very humble beginings, yet is a billionaire who has vowed to die broke by giving it all away. Any one, from any beginning can become wealthy, as long as they want to be bad enough, work hard enough for it, and make the correct choices along the way. IMO, that is what handouts rob from those it is meant to help most.Quote:
Nevertheless, I don't see what that has to do with the conversation. We're not talking about people like you and I.
Quote:
No matter how many $200 dollar knives, or external hard drives we could afford to buy in a year, we are still in that bottom 99% of that wealth distribution. The top 1% can buy a few $3,000 bottles of champaign with dinner, or a $250,000 Katana for his sword collect. That is the kind of wealth which needs to be redistributed.
A ways back you said:
So now you dont think the excellent swordsmith should be paid for his skills and education, or the producer that can produce a bottle of champagne that someone would pay 3,000 dollars for? Do you notice how wealth was re-distributed naturally? The wealthy person gave his wealth to a craftsman, the interesting thing is they both got value for value. Both walked away feeling satisfied and happy with the deal.Quote:
There once was a time when a skilled craftsman could be recognized for the quality of work, respected for the time and education it took to become that skilled, and be paid accordingly. Those skilled craftsman have been bought out by big corporations, those precious goods are now machine made, and the days of skilled machine operators seem to be numbered.
Who do you think builds the huge homes the wealthy live in, the cars they drive, the food they eat, the products they buy? The rich already have their money and can afford not to buy new things, invest in new ventures, or for that matter make more taxable income. I think that every one that thinks that their supposed greed will keep them producing no matter how big a load you throw on their back, will find the rich arent as greedy as they may seem to some, instead they will suddenly become content with what they have, and we will get no new economic growth and no new tax revenue for you to re-distribute.
,Quote:
your absolutely correct. Humans are condemned to choose
And condemned to live with/pay for, the consequences of choices they make, not to force others to pay for the consequences of their choices.
Bernie Madoff? Oh yeah...isn't he the one who got busted for impersonating a United States Congressman?? Yeah that lying, stealing, cheating bastard :rant:Quote:
Originally Posted by freyguy
I am not trying to make my life the template. Other people can do the same thing I have done, other people can do less, and still others can do MUCH more. That's the great thing about America; we all have the same opportunity. All I'm saying is that a lot of people bitch about their station in life, while doing nothing to improve it. If you want to stay in your comfort zone, fine. Just don't blame your circumstances on someone else. I realize that I am painting with broad strokes, and not everyone is like that. I get that some people actually are stuck due to circumstances they can't control... But there are also a lot of people that could do more, and simply don't. Some people are willing to sacrifice to win, others expect to just win without having to put the effort in to it.Quote:
Originally Posted by commiecat
Still with the greedy hog CEO's? Really? Do you realize that there are over 15,000 publicly traded corporations in the US? For almost all of them, the CEO is a position hired by the shareholders. If the CEOs did nothing but sit around and do nothing while collecting a fat paycheck, don't you think the board would fire them? I'm quite certain that the shareholders want the companies to do well...Quote:
Originally Posted by freyguy
Furthermore there are probably at least twice as many privately held corporations as public, so let's just say there are 45,000 corporations in America (that estimate is probably low), that means that there are 45,000 fat lazy slob worthless human being CEOs that are sucking the life blood out of their employees. Is that a reasonable estimate to you?
I'm guessing it's closer to a fraction of a percent that are as bad as you make them all out to be.
Certainly a happy worker is a good worker. But, when there is a whole line of people that want the exact same job for the same pay, the worker had better do exceptional work. As long as the employee is providing value to the company, they should be compensated accordingly. Most companies will make that effort to hold on to the best people.Quote:
Originally Posted by freyguy
That's where unions have killed the working man, IMO.
Adjusted for inflation, the standard of living is 6x higher today than it was 100 years ago. Even people in dire economic circumstances have televisions and cell phones. People do have more debt today than they did years ago, but there is a difference between debt and standard of living.Quote:
Originally Posted by thebigspendur
We have a minimum wage here as well, and it is exactly as you describe... Not enough to support a family, and very few people actually earn that little.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sailor
If someone had given me a check in order to afford lunch, I would have still worked to better myself. Despite being in a more comfortable position today, I still strive to be in a better position tomorrow, because thats the kind of person I am. When I find myself comfortable, I know it's time for me to get up and start busting my hump again to get to the next challenge.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jasongreat
The redistribution of wealth that is being suggested is not nearly as extreme as everyone seems to suggest. We're not talking about someone below the poverty line being brought up to a comfortable living situation. Nor will a Bill Gates or Steve Jobs be slumming it on the streets. Instead we're talking about balance. Closing the huge gap between the middle class and the upper class. Let's be real. Bill Gates alone has more money then he could spend in a single life time. What do you even do with that money? There has got to be a point when you can say, I have more money then I can could ever desire.
Don't mean to get off-topic, but Bill Gates and his wife have given more than $28B to charity. Warren Buffet has given more than $40B. Yes, these are probably exceptions in the world of billionaires, but I felt it was worth noting as you cited Gates specifically.Quote:
Originally Posted by freyguy
It depends how you define standard of living. Back in the 1950s families were able to survive very well on 1 paycheck. That is in the realm of the few these days. Back then you bought when you had the money. Credit Cards existed but not for the average person. If credit cards really disappeared overnight this country would go down the tubes. As far as ownership of goods goes through the ages there is always a changing notion of what people acquire and how those things define their socio-economic status. At times having a horse and a nice saddle and a buckboard said you had made it. Having a car and a TV and a Cell Phone doesn't mean you have a good standard of living. Back in the 1950s everyone could afford healthcare now many can't and die because of it.
I think you should all pay special attention to this teaching tool developed by the Comparative Philosophy Department of the University of Wooloomoolloo (touches on Aristotle toward the end) before continuing your discussion here.
YouTube - Bruce's Philosophers Song
James.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimbo
Crack Dew!
I wonder if people can stop thinking in terms of better and worse and just say different? That is how I think. Change is inevitable, and it means for a while you live under a different set of circumstances. Eventually, the mileometer it reset to 0, and that's not quite good enough either.
Gentleman, I urge you to sit back and ride the wave, for nothing is fixed and nothing is ever perfect.
Ah c'mon... Aristotle a bugger for the bottle? Maybe an amphora, but that don't rhyme does it?Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimbo
You ain't heard of the Surfaris have you? :Quote:
Originally Posted by gregs656
YouTube - The Surfaris Wipe out 1963
For the record, we are not a Democracy we are a Representative Republic.