or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Dubai - Page 2

post #16 of 32
Pheuw, L3 was tougher than I thought. 50/50 chance for me I'd say. I just managed to finish both on the last several minutes, but the afternoon session was way more difficult than Level 1 and 2. Tons of uncommon jargons thrown away on the multiple choices. Hopefully I'll pass otherwise it would be a great pain to repeat all of these next year.
post #17 of 32
Don't want to open a can of worms with this one but...
Quote:
Interesting theory I read recently, that the Constitution and our government were modeled after the Iroquois nation, with one major difference, which you all might find fascinating. Then we systematically exterminated Indians and stole their land...
My ancestors didn't kill any Indians or steal their land.  My great grandfather came to America in 1912.  The rest of my ancestors came around the same time period.  They left Poland to escape the Russians, Prussians, and Austria-Hungarians who were oppressing them.  Therefore, I can't feel much guilt or shame for what happened in this country before then.  Was it wrong?  By today's standards, yes.  Was it horrible?  Yes.  But no one in my family was in anyway responsible.   Does this have any bearing on this thread?  No.  I figured since a few other people could turn a thread about Dubai into a comment on politics and the state of our "oppressive and prejudiced" country I could add my few cents.  I'm stepping off the soap box now
post #18 of 32
I can see your logic. I think my direct descendants arrived here about the same time as yours... So what do you think then about the issue of slavery?
post #19 of 32
Steve, maybe I missed it. What's the difference, that we may find interesting?
post #20 of 32
J., ever the observant one... The upper house in the Iroquois nation, or what became our senate, was composed solely of women. And when the two houses conflicted, the womens' vote overruled the men...
post #21 of 32
Interesting indeed, but I was of the impression that the House of Commons / House of Lords model of Parliament was the model on which our Congress was based. I don't know how I'd feel about having an entire house of women above the house of men, but I'm sure we'd have been pulled into less wars over the years.
post #22 of 32
I think that's the common perception, but another view is that the Founding Fathers wanted to get away from British customs as far as possible. I saw the Iroquois assertion in one of those offbeat books I read- "I", by David Hawkins. The women thing I heard from an Indian chief who gave a talk I attended earlier this year. Apparently there were 16 separate petitions that needed to be filed and approved before a tribe could go to war. If the men still persisted, the mothers of the combatants ran onto the battlefield, forcing the men to kill their own mothers before each other. Don't know if these guys are blowing smoke or not, but it's a pretty interesting idea, isn't it? Bet it would stop a lot of testosterone fueled wars.
post #23 of 32
A 21st century tea party.
post #24 of 32
Quote:
For once I agree with Vero as well.
Why, thank you.
Quote:
America is no longer the place the founders intended.  I reflect as a young man on the opportunities available in the country and it seems as if the opportunity for "poineering" that once existed here seems sparse these days at best.
Naw, the opportunities are so "there" it's amazing. What has changed is the attitudes of Americans. We used to be a nation of entrepreneurs, capitalists, small business people. Now it seems people want to be coddled by their employers and the governments, local, state and federal. It's all about entitlements now. We still have more opportunities than the citizens of other countries; we've just gotten fat (literally) and complacent. I realize that's a generalization, but the WWII generation would likely agree with me maybe?
Quote:
it seems the rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer- I don't have a solution, but I'd be open to anyone who has one.....
The solution is to not be a fatalist -- stop thinking that "the rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer." If you think it so, it will be so. Some 'rich' (if you must be so "classist" ) DO get poorer, and some 'poor' (ditto) DO get richer. Saying the cliche is too easy of a cop-out in my book. You can get rich and you can get poor. Much of it has to do with the decisions you make in life. Now you guys probably don't agree with me anymore.
post #25 of 32
I still agree. I think the only solution is really to realize that realistically you will not make a difference in the political system of this country, make the best for yourself and try to have a good life keeping as much of your income and material resources as possible and putting as much of it toward causes you consider good, and ensure a comfortable life for your future generations, while taking time to impart upon them as much of your experience as possible. That's all anyone can really aspire to unless he is born into the proper connections.
post #26 of 32
Quote:
That being said-  I guess my definition of "rich" is, in the words of Gordon Gekko: "not the fat cat making $500K a year, flying first class."  I'd say that is upper middle class.   but I just get the feeling America is all about the "bling" these days and not about the honor, valiance, and hard work of the WWII generation you cited.
In my book, a fat cat making $500,000 a year is "rich" due to the high income. But, he or she may not be "wealthy" based on his or her net worth (assets minus debt). Many people making $500,000 a year spend it all on crap and have little of long-term value to show for it. These are the "high lifers". They don't value the money they make very highly, so they waste it all on crap instead of investing it to build true wealth. Those concerned about "bling" are posers. They are not really rich or wealthy by most definitions, but they sure want to convince you and themselves that they are rich or wealthy. They are "All Hat and No Cattle" as we say here in Texas. These include many of the people you see driving around in leased Mercedeses and BMWs in your neighborhood. That's a big expense going out of the bank account every month. Don't worry, there are still Americans out there that believe in honor, valiance, and hard work. You have to turn off the TV or radio and go out and look for them to find them, but they are out there.
post #27 of 32
Steve, Was there another reason that the women's votes overruled the men's votes? Or was it mainly to prevent unnecessary wars? Just curious. CTG, Good point about our society becoming the "bling" generation. It's pretty sad. I'm sure y'all have each seen at least one episode of VH-1's "Fabulous Life of <Insert Star of the Moment>." Typical average viewers see what money can buy ($50,000 pinky rings, a hotel room for your dog, professional crotch shampooing, etc), but they lose sight of the hard work and dedication it takes the average talentless person (which most celebrities are, anyway) to make it. On top of all that, we now have Jessica Simpson encouraging every little girl in America to think, "Gee, mommy, when I grow up, I hope I'm a ditz."
post #28 of 32
Navy: Main reason I believe was the war thing. However, I was also led to believe that the Indians revered women as extensions of Mother Earth, more connected to nature and its natural cycles which were the bases for Native American spirituality. This is perhaps why they felt women could make better decisions.
post #29 of 32
Makes sense. Thanks for the information.
post #30 of 32
Quote:
I saw the Iroquois assertion in one of those offbeat books I read- "I", by David Hawkins. The women thing I heard from an Indian chief who gave a talk I attended earlier this year. Apparently there were 16 separate petitions that needed to be filed and approved before a tribe could go to war. If the men still persisted, the mothers of the combatants ran onto the battlefield, forcing the men to kill their own mothers before each other. Don't know if these guys are blowing smoke or not, but it's a pretty interesting idea, isn't it? Bet it would stop a lot of testosterone fueled wars.
Sounds good to me.  Instead of invading Iraq, America and the "coalition of the willing" would make fun of Iraq behind its back until it developed an eating disorder.  
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home