dpb

<snip> Last post, then I'm back to my thesis work. You're comparing the individuals on this forum, those who are promoting freedom of thought and expression(all of us), with those who have specifically worked to destroy those ideals. Racists, nazis, communist terrorists, murderers and totalitarian dictators have ideals that differ greatly from those described in socialist thought. And the way I see it, that is what we are promoting...not socialism itslelf, but the idea of THOUGHT, of questioning the issues that are so often accepted at face value in our society. You're missing the point of this forum. This is a place where ideas can be freely exchanged...where ideas can be challenged, agruments made and rebutted. Why are you talking to "them"? Because you can. Because the fact that this forum exists is a credit to the freedom that you claim to support, and yet you have so porely defended. "We" are not here to disrupt "your" forum...it wouldn't exist without us. I've followed this thread, and was just waiting for someone to jump on this bandwagon of last resort. Your post is off-topic, offensive name-calling that serves no purpose. You fail to put forth any intelligent ideas or make anything even close to a cogent argument. I suggest you open your eyes and take a look around, and then look at yourself. Ask yourself: What ideals am I promoting when I try and close this open dialogue? What do I accomplish by scaring away those who are willing to take a contradictory opinion? I am neither nazi, murder, communist, recist, terrorist nor totalitarian dictator, I assure you. I'm one of "these people" who express thought, and take advantage of the freedom that we are so lucky to afford. More than the exchange of "value for value", I believe in the concept of trading ideas for ideas, something which, based on your last post, you obviously do not. Cheers, dpb

Old Geezer, I like your comments. I'd just like to add that there are a LOT of people from other countries who come here and are treated like garbage. It's staggering that someone can immigrate to the US or Canada with a masters or PHD and end up working in retail, or some other job that, suffice to say, doesn't exploit their abilities. Think about it...these are successful individuals who came here for some purpose...to escape their own country's oppressive policies...to find the proverbial 'american dream'....who knows. But are they happy? Now what is the likelihood that someone living a lifetime of poverty will be "brilliantly successful" here when someone with a PHD can barely support his or her family? I agree with Old Geezer when he implies that "successful" and "happy" are terms that can't just be tossed around without being qualified. dpb

I have to chime in on a few posts here. It's too much. "The ambassador and the general were briefing me on the — the vast majority of Iraqis want to live in a peaceful, free world. And we will find these people and we will bring them to justice." —George W. Bush, Washington, D.C., Oct. 27, 2003 "[A]s you know, these are open forums, you're able to come and listen to what I have to say." —George W. Bush, Washington, D.C., Oct. 28, 2003 Not the words of a socialist, friend. Are you saying that researchers, scholars and academics are in it for the money? In my many years of working at a university I have yet to meet a single case to prove your point. And if such a case does exist, s/he is in the most infinitesimal of minorities. And if you're saying the innovation comes from elsewhere (corporations), I highly doubt that the R&D folks go to work every day dispising their jobs, and only come home happy on that glorious Thursday when the cheque is in the mailbox. But on the other hand, the above quote is correct, but not in the context in which you wrote it. Innovation comes from the necessity of the individual to fulfill their sense of self-worth. People innovate because it satisfies their own selfish need for satisfaction. Maybe it satisfies their need to serve the greater good, to share what they have learned with others. If I discovered a cure for cancer and told nobody, I probably wouldn't feel very good about myself. I think Static was arguing that people have passions, and are willing to follow them despite the potential financial consequences. But at the same time, these innovators are being as selfish as one would expect of a human being. Their work fulfills this need or desire within, this inherant goal make a difference in the world. To be selfish and to be selfless are two sides of the same coin. The way I see it, if you don't want to contribute and "post to the forum" (be an astronaut, artist, teacher, academic or contribute in any other way to society) and care only about the money, then you can be selfish work at some menial job. Think about it: You're getting paid the same as those "poor bastards" who have chosen to pursue their dreams...you just don't have to work as hard for it. dpb