CreateDebate is a social debate community built around ideas, discussion and democracy.
If this is your first time checking out a debate, here are some quick tips to help get you started:
Arguments with the highest score are displayed first.
Argument replies (both in favor and in opposition) are displayed below the original argument.
To follow along, you may find it helpful to show and hide the replies displayed below each argument.
To vote for an argument, use these icons:
You have the power to cast exactly one vote (either up or down) for each argument.
Once you vote, the icon will become grayed out and the argument's score will change.
Yes, you can change your vote.
Debate scores, side scores and tag scores are automatically calculated by an algorithm that primarily takes argument scores into account.
All scores are updated in real-time.
To learn more about the CreateDebate scoring system, check out the FAQ.
When you are ready to voice your opinion, use the Add Argument button to create an argument.
If you would like to address an existing argument, use the Support and Dispute link within that argument to create a new reply.
You can share this debate in three different ways:
#1
#2
#3
Paste this URL into an email or IM:
Click here to send this debate via your default email application.
Click here to login and CreateDebate will send an email for you.
is life better today than it was in the early 1900's
for those who were born before 1940...
You were born before television, before penicillin, antibiotics, polio shots, frozen foods, Xerox machines, plastic, contact lenses, videos, frisbees and the pill. We were born before radar, credit cards, split atoms, laser beams and ball point pens: before dishwashers, tumble driers, electric blankets, air conditioners, drip dry clothes and before man walked on the moon.
You got married first and then lived together (how old fashioned can you be?). We thought 'fast food' was what you ate in Lent, a 'big Mac' was an oversized rain coat and a crumpet we had for tea! We existed before 'house husbands', computer dating, dual careers, and when a 'meaningful relationship' meant getting along with cousins, and 'sheltered accommodation' was where you waited for a bus!
You were before day centres, group homes and disposable nappies. We had never heard of FM radio, tape decks, electric typewriters, artificial hearts, word processors, yoghurt and men wearing earrings. For us, 'time sharing' meant togetherness and a chip was a piece of wood or a fried potato. Hardware meant nuts and bolts, and software was not even a word!
Before 1940, 'made in Japan' meant junk, and the term 'making out' referred to how you did in your exams. A stud was something you fastened a collar to a shirt with, and 'going all the way' meant staying on the bus until it reached the terminus. Pizzas, Mcdonald's and instant coffees were unheard of. In our day cigarette smoking was fashionable and 'grass' was mown, 'coke' kept in the coal house, a 'joint' was a piece of meat you had on Sundays and 'pot' was something you cooked in.
'Rock Music' was a grandmother's lullaby, and a 'gay' person was the life and soul of the party and nothing more. Aids meant a form of beauty treatment or help for someone in trouble.
People live longer, have more stuff and more freedom, and are far healthier than they have ever been in the history of the world, and on a large scale.
If you want to know what it was like to be an average Joe in the early 1900's move to a third world country and you'll get a good idea.
First, we must consider the question of how to 'rate' life. I would consider happiness, health and prosperity to be the primary factors.
Happiness
This is the most difficult issue to deal with. People who lived in the early 1900's would not have known of the possibilities that are granted by modern technology, so it is reasonable to assume that they would not have felt overly unfulfilled due to the relatively primitive level of civilization they inhabited.
An analogy: a Playstation 2 is perfectly acceptable to a child, the superlative form of electronic entertainment, until said child sees the capabilities of the Playstation 3, whereafter the inferiority of the former becomes readily apparent.
So we must assume that our primary advantage in this area is the intrinsic happiness found in pursuing those possibilities; visiting the Caribbean, attending concerts, electronic entertainment, accessible music, etcetera.
Health
When Alexander Fleming accidentally discovered Penicillin's bacteria-fighting capabilities in 1928, humans took the first tentative steps on the road to modern antibiotics. Before said, the options for fighting bacterial infections were limited at best. Naturally, the introduction of antibiotics has lead to a significant decrease in mortalities from said. In addition to this, innumerable advances have been made in surgery practices, understanding of human anatomy, treatment vectors etcetera. Today, humans live to an average age (1) of 76.5, contrasted with 49.2 in 1900.
Prosperity
It is necessary to look beyond the current adverse circumstances in this area. Massive advances in manufacturing techniques and technology have allowed us to bring products to almost the entire developed world. In addition, modern agricultural practices have virtually eliminated hunger from the civilized world. In no other era has the common man had such wealth to his name.
we have made some progress. i admit there are still a lot of problems, but over all we have improved ourselves. Most importantly, at least to me, we have gotten closer to equality for all, with the exception of a few bigots.
Yes, it is all due to capitalism. Capitalism creates wealth, which develops progress in technology and knowledge.
You're joking, right?
The 1900s were nearing the end of the Industrial Revolution nightmare, where there were no social programs to help those who were literally starving due to poverty. The stock market crash in the coming decades only made things harder for many people, and it occurred with a lack of regulation and law.
I'd say that we juggled with knives the better part of the last century and got where we are in spite of capitalism.
Seriously, when is the Industrial Revolution rhetoric going to end?
Is this really your only argument? We been over this multiple times.
Industrial Revolution was the stepping stone to America's success, and if it wasn't for the Industrial Revolution, America would have been stagnate for years of technological and scientific advancement.
Government is simply to slow to adopt to market changes.
The stock market was not the cause of the Great depression nor was capitalism was the cause of the Great Recession.
The cause was of government interference in the market, it was not because of the lack of regulation or law, it was the act of failed government polices.
Capitalism is simply unable to fail because there is no central planning.
I'd say that we juggled with knives the better part of the last century and got where we are in spite of capitalism.
So, you are going to tribute America's success to government?
Give me a break!
Capitalism is the sole reason for the technological and scientific advancement in America.
Seriously, when is the Industrial Revolution rhetoric going to end?
If you're asking me seriously: when people learn from that very tragic history and resolve not to repeat it. That is when I will stop bringing it up.
Industrial Revolution was the stepping stone to America's success, and if it wasn't for the Industrial Revolution, America would have been stagnate for years of technological and scientific advancement.
Correct. So why won't you acknowledge that it caused a nightmare to the workers during its period in Britain and America?
Does your reasoning preclude the ability for a technological stepping stone to have bad social consequences?
Government is simply to slow to adapt to market changes.
No argument here.
The stock market was not the cause of the Great depression nor was capitalism was the cause of the Great Recession.
Free market capitalism allowed and in fact encouraged insider trading, and all sorts of corruption surrounding the stock market. I say encouraged because this was a viable way to make a large profit in the market, through abusing the system.
It also failed to provide on its own a private-sector version of an economic safety net. The government had to do this later.
In other words, without state regulation the market failed to regulate out behaviours that could cause market collapse and failed to provide its own solution to a collapse before the recession happened.
Capitalism is simply unable to fail because there is no central planning.
By your reasoning species shouldn't go extinct.
So, you are going to tribute America's success to government?
Life is more complicated than that. We became a success in the middle part of the twentieth century because of science, local industry, a war that drove innovation and fostered a new culture, and regulations that made the market safer.
Capitalism is the sole reason for the technological and scientific advancement in America.
when people learn from that very tragic history and resolve not to repeat it. That is when I will stop bringing it up.
So, was the most prosperous time in Humanity's history of all classes a tragic history?
Correct. So why won't you acknowledge that it caused a nightmare to the workers during its period in Britain and America?
No, as already mentioned, it wasn't as bad your governmental sources gain.
No argument here.
Yet, you worship it like a god.
Free market capitalism allowed and in fact encouraged insider trading, and all sorts of corruption surrounding the stock market. I say encouraged because this was a viable way to make a large profit in the market, through abusing the system.
It also failed to provide on its own a private-sector version of an economic safety net. The government had to do this later.
In other words, without state regulation the market failed to regulate out behaviours that could cause market collapse and failed to provide its own solution to a collapse before the recession happened.
Derp!! This is fun. You are a robot reading right from the liberal rhetoric handbook guide, yet you deny it. SAD!!!
By your reasoning species shouldn't go extinct.
Irrelevant to this topic. Next...
Life is more complicated than that.
Your deluded mind only makes it think it that complicated.
Government doesn't do anything correct. Never did never will. Government wastes.
I can now call someone across the world in seconds, we have several machines and people constantly going to and from outer space, there are computers, smart phones, robots that assist cripples, etc.
Don't try to tell me life was better back then because you're feeling nostalgic. Move or be moved.
The Great Depression occured because of a free market crash. The Free Market crashed because there was no oversite or rules of practice. We got out of the Great Depression by implementing vast government programs and project works, and we set up safety nets like Unemployment Insurance, which is the only thing that saved us from another great depression this time - which again almost occured because of a free market crash due directly to rampant deregulation of the free market since the 80's.
The Great Depression occured because of a free market crash. The Free Market crashed because there was no oversite or rules of practice. We got out of the Great Depression by implementing vast government programs and project works, and we set up safety nets like Unemployment Insurance, which is the only thing that saved us from another great depression this time - which again almost occured because of a free market crash due directly to rampant deregulation of the free market since the 80's.
He won't listen because in his mind anything that contradicts Libertarian Policy is a government conspiracy.
We still have problems today, but life considerably better. We have higher living standards, better food, advanced technology, higher life expectancies, better medicine, better transportation, better communications, more scientific answers and discoveries, etc.
It takes a change of culture, of the mode of reactions to circumstances, to effect a change of habit. Genetics is the progeny of culture, not vice versa. This applies in ALL fields of human activities, including economy, to ALL personal and social behavioral aspects.
Since the early 1900’s ALL “science” has been taken over by the Technology Culture of the religious Americans, represented by the trade-union-church AAAS. Plain and simple. There has not been any science in the world since then except “religious-American-science”.
On the blissful religious science ignorance…:
USA-World Science Hegemony Is Science Blind
Since the early 2000s I have been posting many articles on science items surveyed and analyzed by me, without religious background-concepts. I have been doing this because I was deeply disturbed by the religiosity of the 1848-founded AAAS trade-union and by the consequent religious background-tint of its extensive “scientific” publications and activities.
On my next birthday I’ll be 88-yrs old. I know that I’m deeply engaged in a Don Quixotic mission-war to extricate-free the USA and world Science from the clutches and consequences of the religious-trade-union-church AAAS, adopted strangely by the majority of scientifically ignorant religious god-trusting Americans and by their most other humanity following flocks…
But I am sincerely confident that only thus it is feasible and possible to embark on a new, rational, Human culture (Scientism) and on new more beneficial and effective technology courses for humanity…
I am a young adult, currently writing a paper on this very topic. America would be better if we went " back to mayberry" and I would have to say that children respected and listened to parents better, most people worked for what they had, and thus appreciated it a lot more. also, most people had some level of connection with one another, you said hi to your neighbors and you helped a person in need if you could. people today don't care, unless it serves them. I'd say people "back in the day" were a lot better off, yes there were troubles. BUT people banded together and took care of the problems. yes things like health were not as good, BUT people made more out of the years they had. yes there was war, BUT there always will be. Yes there was more health issues, BUT again people could afford to have the dr come to your house and at least try! most people today cant afford a dr. And as far as food and such, it was better for you, because storage or not. food was grown and it was either eaten or traded for something a family needed. People respected their elders and took care of them, NOT like today where the send the "to the homes". personally I think it would be much better. and that's my take, and a part of my paper :)
Well in the early 1900's women and men were very Committed to one another which made marriages last a very long time, and both men and women had to struggle to make ends meat. Many women today make a very good income and are very independent as well since they don't need a man to survive. But that turned out to be very difficult for many of us good innocent men out there looking to meet a good woman to settle down with since many women now are looking for men with money, and can't accept us men for who we are. These are very good reasons why many of us men are still single today since we really can't blame ourselves either. My aunt and uncle just celebrated their 65th year together, and they are still together today. There are many of us men that that would have certainly wanted to be married and have a family too, and if we could only meet a good woman to make us happy rather than being Alone which would had been Great.
You would probably experience war, have to fight is it or even lose family members because of it. Also there and bigger jobs, longer life expectancies and better jobs now than in the 1900’s. Of those kids who managed to get a job many were treated harshly and wouldn’t get paid fairly. Now kids don’t have to work and are very lucky. They usually get about the same amount of money as the kids did back then from their family as presents.
We drink too much, smoke too much, spend too recklessly, laugh too little, drive too fast, get too angry, stay up too late, get up too tired, read too little, watch TV too much, and enjoy life too seldom.
We have multiplied our possessions, but reduced our values.
We talk too much, love too seldom, and hate too often.
We've learned how to make a living, but not a life.
We've added years to life not life to years.
We've been all the way to the moon and back, but have trouble crossing the street to meet a new neighbor.
We conquered outer space but not inner space.
We've done larger things, but not better things.
We've cleaned up the air, but polluted the soul.
We've conquered the atom, but not our prejudice.
We write more, but learn less.
We plan more, but accomplish less.
We've learned to rush, but not to wait.
We build more computers to hold more information, to produce more copies than ever, but we communicate less and less.
These are the times of fast foods and slow digestion, big men and small character, steep profits and shallow relationships.
These are the days of two incomes but more divorce, fancier houses, but broken homes.
These are days of quick trips, disposable diapers, throwaway morality, one night stands, overweight bodies, and pills that do everything from cheer, to quiet, to kill.
It is a time when there is much in the showroom window and nothing in the stockroom.
A time when technology can bring this letter to you, and a time when you can choose either to share this insight, or to just hit delete...
This is schmaltz. I understand your frustration with certain aspect of the modern world, but don't be taken in by sappy mass-forwarded chain emails. This sort of selective nostalgia is useless; indeed, things are not perfect today, but it is better to focus on the actions we can take to improve things, rather than inaccurately reminiscing about the past.
In the 1900s, some cities claimed a 30% infant mortality rate before the first year. Penicillin had not even been invented, and something as minor as pneumonia could very well be fatal. The average life expectancy was not even fifty years; today, we can expect to live more than a quarter century longer than that.
1 in 10 people were completely illiterate. It is guessed that anywhere from 30-50% of families lived below the poverty level, and that might have meant literally only being able to afford enough bread and water not to die of starvation. Women were not allowed to vote, and interracial marriages were illegal in most states.
People in the 1900s were probably just as likely (or more likely, in some respects) to be hateful, unhealthy, stupid, closed-minded, uneducated, judgmental, unfriendly, or whatever negative qualities the author cared to attribute largely to the modern world.
People are a lot less healthy today than they were 100 years ago. Obesity is at an all-time high. People are not as physically active as they were then. People then did not sit in cubicles all day in front of a computer. They were outside in the fresh air and sunshine tending their gardens (which, by the way, were grown in quality soil with little or no pesticides) or working on their farms. There is no data on poverty rates in the 1900's, but even if it was high, it wouldn't mean much because most people lived off the land, not the dollar. A self-sufficient farmer had little need of grocery money. I suspect that many farmers living under the poverty line actually lived better lives than many wage-earners at the time who were above it.
The literacy rates today are nothing to brag about. Quality of education is pretty much at an all-time low. See Charlotte Iserbyt's book The Deliberate Dumbing Down of America. http://www.deliberatedumbingdown.com/
People who had money had real value in the form of gold and silver coin, not paper money and blips on a computer screen. America is now the number one debtor nation. People today are insane, they call debtwealth .
People are a lot less healthy today than they were 100 years ago. Obesity is at an all-time high.
Certainly, as I said, the world is not ideal today. But we live 25 years longer and we're probably not going to die of tuberculosis or lose our children to pneumonia, thanks to advancements in the medical field. How can you know those facts and continue to say we are less healthy than a people who did not even live to 50?
People are not as physically active as they were then. People then did not sit in cubicles all day in front of a computer. They were outside in the fresh air and sunshine tending their gardens (which, by the way, were grown in quality soil with little or no pesticides) or working on their farms. There is no data on poverty rates in the 1900's, but even if it was high, it wouldn't mean much because most people lived off the land, not the dollar. A self-sufficient farmer had little need of grocery money. I suspect that many farmers living under the poverty line actually lived better lives than many wage-earners at the time who were above it.
Sure, many people did live like this. Today, many people still live like this. But you are describing the United States as though it was nothing but spacious, idyllic farmland from coast to coast, and that's kind of silly. Don't forget that even for the people who did live like this, life was not easy; there is still the matter of disease and inflated infant mortality rate, as well as the huge amount of physical labor this lifestyle demanded. Not that hard work is bad, but it certainly leaves little time for education or personal pursuits.
Meanwhile, urban growth was exploding and cities housed about half of the population. They certainly did not spend their time 'outside in the fresh air and the sunshine tending their gardens'. They spent their time in factories and tenement buildings, fighting poverty, disease, and overcrowding. This time period also saw the largest influx of poor immigrants in American history, which only worsened conditions in cities without any sanitation laws.
The literacy rates today are nothing to brag about. Quality of education is pretty much at an all-time low. See Charlotte Iserbyt's book The Deliberate Dumbing Down of America.
I would not argue that education in America is a sad affair, especially in relation to the achievements of other countries. But remember, this is not just a debate about how good/bad things are now, it's about how good/bad they are in comparison to the 1900s. In the 1900s, many people never attended school, and plenty of those that did only received a few years of it. Rural schools were staffed by a teacher with little formal education themselves teaching a class that was not even age-graded. Urban schools were so overcrowded they had to turn students away. I would gladly bet that, at any age, the average student of today would have a better, more complete education the average student of 1900.
People who had money had real value in the form of gold and silver coin, not paper money and blips on a computer screen. America is now the number one debtor nation. People today are insane, they call debt wealth .
The fact of the matter is that people today, even the relatively poor, have longer lives, more space, luxury, and leisure time than their equivalents 100 years ago. I am not claiming that America has no problems, just that the length and quality of life for its citizens has increased. This is pretty hard to factually argue.
we live 25 years longer and we're probably not going to die of tuberculosis or lose our children to pneumonia, thanks to advancements in the medical field. How can you know those facts and continue to say we are less healthy than a people who did not even live to 50?
Chances are 1 in 2 that you will get some form of cancer during your lifetime. Cancer was a rarity a century ago. I think that overshadows tuberculosis and pneumonia together. Heart disease, stroke, diabetes, hypertension are skyrocketing thanks to the modern diet and sedentary lifestyle. A long lifespan doesn't necessarily mean a better life. Senior citizens are on an average of 6 different medications, many of which have unpleasant side effects.
you are describing the United States as though it was nothing but spacious, idyllic farmland
Far, far more of the population lived on family farms than do now. It's a healthier lifestyle than the average desk job or manufacturing job.
the length and quality of life for its citizens has increased. This is pretty hard to factually argue.
I'll not argue about the lifespan being longer, I can argue that quality of life has diminished. Yes, we have more leisure time to watch sports on TV, fidget with our I-Pads, surf porn, and yap away on our cell phones, but is that really a quality life? Children do not even play outside anymore, they are all cooped-up inside playing video games. I fail to see how that is an improvement.
Who knows what ill effects people in the 1900s would have suffered from in old age if most of them had actually lived to reach old age?
While your argument does identify a lot of common complaints about modern society, it ignores the fact that modern people still have far more choices and opportunities than they did in the 1900s, in every aspect of life. If we wish, we can be vegans, raw foodists, or gluten-free; we have more time to exercise and socialize if we want; online schools, community colleges, and grants have made higher education a possibility for many more people; prejudice is still a problem, but the civil rights movement has made progress by leaps and bounds; and population growth and immigration are both proportionately lower than they were a century ago.
Even if most people do not make the choices you believe are necessary for a quality life, at least today, the luxury of those choices are there for them.
"How so? By living longer, fewer diseases, more opportunities, more comfortable, easier travel, higher literacy rates, better access to medicine, etc."
I can give many reasons on why quality of life has diminished here is just a few of them:
1900s-children used to go outside and make friends
modern day-children stay home and play PS3,Xbox etc.
also in the modern day sex before marriage has now been encouraged and the fearful consequence of actually having a baby solved by murder.
" easier travel"
in the past going to another country was an adventure that would be treasured forever, it was also another reason to join the army.Many holidays were instead taken in the next town in a hotel.
Nowadays a holiday is just a plane trip to another place where you have just buy things to bring back to your own country, it has also killed many local tourist trades.My own town in England is by the beach, but why come here when you can go to Spain.
travel has also made the world a smaller place companies have taking over this planet with no intention but to milk it dry. instead of everyone owning one cosy little shop and all getting a little extra money, huge business knock them out and monopolise industries.
"better access to medicine"
In what way? the only thing that has really changed was the way of paying (which has been made better in Britian but is still the same in U.S.A)
Going to another country is still a wonderful experience. I know some people that haven't even been out of my state...ever. I was blessed to be born into a family that could afford to travel to many places, but everyone isn't. You don't consider more people being able to travel to far away places as progress? It may not help the small towns, but people are more able to learn about other cultures.
medicine
How about virtually eradicating some diseases that once killed tens of thousands of people. Please don't bring up obesity. I know that it is considered a disease, but the people choose the lifestyle, unlike those diagnosed with polio, or something like that.
opportunities
Like a minority actually being able to hold a higher position than their majority counterpart. All people having to chance to move into another social class. More people able to become land and home owners.
"In the 1900s, some cities claimed a 30% infant mortality rate before the first year. Penicillin had not even been invented, and something as minor as pneumonia could very well be fatal. The average life expectancy was not even fifty years; today, we can expect to live more than a quarter century longer than that. "
and thus have to spend those extra 25 years living in small cramped houses due to over population
"1 in 10 people were completely illiterate."
who cares it's not like people spend any time reading anymore
"It is guessed that anywhere from 30-50% of families lived below the poverty level, and that might have meant literally only being able to afford enough bread and water not to die of starvation."
nowadays people just live off benefits paid by the taxes of others and causeing countries to fall into debt.
"Women were not allowed to vote, and interracial marriages were illegal in most states."
in those times when a husband and wife got marrried they used to decide together, so therefore a husbands vote also included that of the wife. In the modern day if a married couple don't agree they just get divorced.
You take a very "NOW AND GO" attitude toward this topic, Correct? As in you feel as though life these days is pointless because we Don't actually live "Life" anymore? Well, working under this assumption, Ive formulated an answer to youre underlying beliefs, more or less. The society of today works as a whole toward the betterment of Society in the future. A future view is one that is prevalent in modern society, whereas the early 1900s involved a great number of people who upheld the motto "Take what you can get and run." Not to say there weren't hundreds of thousands of people who were honest to god wholesome workers and good little Christians, but for the most part, especially during the Depression, people held horrible life and social attitudes and were living anything but Life. Modernly, People hold less Biases due to the grand increase to educational levels and understanding of more sides of the argument and not just what they were taught hereditarily. As we discover more and more of what is right and what we thought was right but wrong, we come closer and closer to the truth as a whole, and with it absolute understanding and destruction of lies which cause the horrible statements you've made. Not saying you're lying, but its lies combined with the truth to form biased "facts" and statements that have caused you to think such.
everything you said is completly true bout only applies if you lived in the U.S.A and scince you don't teach much British history in the U.S you can't assume that happened to us as well
OH HO HO HO GOOD OL' ENGLAND. Full of wankers and whatnots. Self-centered socialist pricks, the majority of those children. Think that they undertsnad the world. Disgusting. Not to say you are one necessarily. I just have a thing against the idiots of your country as well as the United States of America. And I do happen to know a good amount of British History, thanks. However, you are true in stating that my answer above ascertains mostly if not entirely to the US. As for Brtiain, it was a dangerous, filthy time where socialists and marxists were revolutionizing and Ireland was starting to get pissed, but only starting. Much of the Government's focus was on that of maintaining the Empire or its remnants and keeping the British War machine up top, reducing entirely any funds for improving the life of those in the motherland or instilling new ideas or programs. Life was at a stand still, free to the jaws of any industrious thinker with enough money and malice. Which is why labour laws didnt exist, working class sucked metaphorical penis everyday, quality of life was worhtless and the only way to achieve happiness was through religion, generalized piety or ignorance of the Status Quo. Germany had many on edge, and many fell off that same edge. Depression and sadness ran rampant through the time between the turn of the century and the end of the Second Great War. Men controlled women and beat they children often in the populated areas. Disease was common, as was death. Desperate times, desperate measures. Everyone was on edge, for political revolution, war, crime, disease, death, social reform, religion and otherwise.
As for today, The world requires something to keep its focus, otherwise we'd have a shitload or several shitloads of people with nothing to do, and unfortuantely we cant just kill them. So there exists a network of entertainment and communication and thrill for the Primary, secondary and tertiary sector workers throughout the world so that the world runs smoothly and doesnt fall into the hands of imbeciles on a massive reformist scale. This goes for England, America, every developed country. Negative radicalism is a result of boredom and illogical, impulsive thought. We use what you perceive as the modern world to prevent that from happening. To prevent the "I want is NAO"s from gaining too much power in the world. Or else we all fail. And there isnt another jesus to unite us all. Thats my view on things. Due to the fact that many worhtless people exist, and we cant just enslave them due to their classification and nature, we must make sure they dont do anything stupid. Thats why the world is so fucking disgusting in every manner. Its necessary.
"OH HO HO HO GOOD OL' ENGLAND. Full of wankers and whatnots. Self-centered socialist pricks, the majority of those children. "
proof that the "great" U.S.A beleives that it is the only country in the world that is important.
"Think that they undertsnad the world. Disgusting."
we conquered a large amount of it including your country
" Not to say you are one necessarily. I just have a thing against the idiots of your country as well as the United States of America"
I will have to agree with you there.but the main cause of Britains life being crapped up since the 1900's is your americanisation of the world
"As for Brtiain, it was a dangerous, filthy time where socialists and marxists were revolutionizing and Ireland was starting to get pissed, but only starting. Much of the Government's focus was on that of maintaining the Empire or its remnants and keeping the British War machine up top, reducing entirely any funds for improving the life of those in the motherland or instilling new ideas or programs."
I would like to know where you got all this fake information. Propaganda leaflet?
"Life was at a stand still, free to the jaws of any industrious thinker with enough money and malice. Which is why labour laws didnt exist, working class sucked metaphorical penis everyday, quality of life was worhtless and the only way to achieve happiness was through religion, generalized piety or ignorance of the Status Quo. "
ok, this is near the end of the Victorian Age where they invented pretty much anything that matters in today's world.society was divided up into 2 classes rich and poor.Poor people could do pretty much what they liked as long as they could afford it sex, pubs,alcohol,everything we do in todays world. (goods were much cheaper in those times as well), the rich had power but they had to hold up an image and a positition and therefore had much more responsability. This was a time where you were brought up to use and enjoy what you had whther it be money and power or the art of a trade.
"Germany had many on edge, and many fell off that same edge. Depression and sadness ran rampant through the time between the turn of the century and the end of the Second Great War."
how is today any different
" Men controlled women and beat they children often in the populated areas."
Another american citizen completly blind to what happens in the real world
" Disease was common, as was death. "
In the modern day no-one dies?
"Desperate times,"
9/11
" desperate measures."
War in the Middle East
"Everyone was on edge, for political revolution, war, crime, disease, death, social reform, religion and otherwise.
"
sorry to disapoint you but this still happens
"As for today, The world requires something to keep its focus, otherwise we'd have a shitload or several shitloads of people with nothing to do,"are you completely deaf or has no-one ever told you the definition of unemployment and benifit fraudsters.
" and unfortuantely we cant just kill them. "
terrible isn't it
"So there exists a network of entertainment and communication and thrill for the Primary,secondary and tertiary sector workers "
something to distract people from what is really happening
" throughout the world "
don't have TV in most of Africa
"so that the world runs smoothly "
You clearly don't watch the news or anything that tells you what is going on this planet. The real world isn't running smoothly, maybe yours is filled with rainbows and unicorns and self-worth. (unless you are completly thick you might notice those last words were your own)
"and doesnt fall into the hands of imbeciles on a massive reformist scale."
these are called conglomerates and come in form of Mcdonalds Cola-cola Microsoft etc.
I laugh how you(being american) could only come up with 2 developed countries for your example.
I can't be asked to smashed up the rest of your mindless made up shit which you saw in some propaganda.
and thus have to spend those extra 25 years living in small cramped houses due to over population
Which do you think has more space - the average single-family inner city apartment, or a dumbbell tenement, which crammed hundreds of people into 13 x 11 rooms and up to four families shared one water closet?
who cares it's not like people spend any time reading anymore
At the very least, they have the ability and the choice to read if they want. This is a luxury many people in the 1900s did not have.
nowadays people just live off benefits paid by the taxes of others and causeing countries to fall into debt.
You are not really offering any evidence that the 1900s were better than today. You are just complaining vaguely about today. Quality and length of life was significantly shorter 100 years ago.
in those times when a husband and wife got marrried they used to decide together, so therefore a husbands vote also included that of the wife. In the modern day if a married couple don't agree they just get divorced.
Don't make excuses for sexism. Women were considered inferior to men; marriage was rarely, if ever, a democracy, wife-beating had only recently become illegal, and the very first agencies meant to enforce these laws and protect battered women were only just being established.
"Which do you think has more space - the average single-family inner city apartment, or a dumbbell tenement, which crammed hundreds of people into 13 x 11 rooms and up to four families shared one water closet?"
I understand your point and in U.S.A those facts would be correct.
"At the very least, they have the ability and the choice to read if they want. This is a luxury many people in the 1900s did not have."
before education was a reward that your parents had worked hard to get, nowadays (because the government provides it) people muck around in class and are brought up with the idea that learning is boring.
"You are not really offering any evidence that the 1900s were better than today. You are just complaining vaguely about today. Quality and length of life was significantly shorter 100 years ago."
ok then here is my proof that we have crapped up life:
We have nedorsed perversion and called it an alternative lifestyle.
We have exploited the poor and called it the lottery
We have neglected the needy and called it self-preservation
We have rewarded laziness and called it welfare
We have killed the unborn and called it a choice
We have shot abortionists and called it justifiable
We have neglected to discipline our children and called it building self-esteem
We have abused power and called it political savvy
We have coveted our neighbours possesions and called it ambition
We have polluted the air with profanity and pornography and called it freedom of expression
We have ridiculed the time-honoured values of our forefathers and called it enlightenment
We have replaced love with lust
We have threaten everyone with nuclear weapons and demand world peace
before education was a reward that your parents had worked hard to get, nowadays (because the government provides it) people muck around in class and are brought up with the idea that learning is boring.
Are you actually arguing that it was good that education was unattainable for most people?
We have nedorsed perversion and called it an alternative lifestyle...
Copying and pasting the opinion of a cranky old conservative isn't really proof.
Some of these things are simply the advancement of civil rights, like gay marriage and abortion.
Others, like the ones referring to jealousy, lust, and abuse of power, could just as easily apply to any time in human history.
Others are false, like the one about neglecting the needy - compared to 100 years ago, the homeless have it a lot better in America, thanks to food banks and shelters. I would hazard a guess that the case is similar in England? Also, don't you think it's odd that they condemn welfare in one breath and in the next, lament the supposed lack of aid for the needy? Even if the welfare system is taken advantage of, it still helps needy people.
Many of the remaining statements make assumptions that could very well be false, and they need their own evidence before it is admissible as supporting data for life being better 100 years ago.
Finally, remember, for the premise of this debate to be false, life today doesn't have to perfect. It doesn't even have to be good. It just has to be better than it was 100 years ago.
"Are you actually arguing that it was good that education was unattainable for most people? "
have you actually been to a public school
"Others, like the ones referring to jealousy, lust, and abuse of power, could just as easily apply to any time in human history.
Others are false, like the one about neglecting the needy - compared to 100 years ago, the homeless have it a lot better in America, thanks to food banks and shelters. I would hazard a guess that the case is similar in England? Also, don't you think it's odd that they condemn welfare in one breath and in the next, lament the supposed lack of aid for the needy? Even if the welfare system is taken advantage of, it still helps needy people.
Many of the remaining statements make assumptions that could very well be false, and they need their own evidence before it is admissible as supporting data for life being better 100 years ago."
Have you actually read the debate title? it says is life better. I don't care if the 1900s sucked, life today still sucks
Your depressed, bias, self-centered opinions dont matter at all. All you do is bitch and bitch and bitch about whats going on now, not why, or how, just the face of everything. If you are so damn disgusted with the world, do something about it that will save the rest of us from this place while upholding your self-proclaimed morals behind your statements. And if you cant, then go get a retropsychosematic and go visit the good ol' days for yourself, yeah? Maybe yours is filled with rainbows and unicorns and self-worth.
I think it's kind of funny that, if he thinks 1900 was better, he could very well someday move to an isolated town in a developing country where technology, medicine and society in general are 100 years behind. He owes this opportunity to modern forms of transportation and globalization.
Have you actually read the debate title? it says is life better. I don't care if the 1900s sucked, life today still sucks
You need to carefully reread my post because you misunderstood it if you don't realize I know what the debate is about and I still disagree.
Even if life sucks today, it sucked more 1900 years ago because of disease, infant mortality, poverty, and low quality of life; if you are going to try to say otherwise, you need more than a forwarded email with no evidence to back itself up.
Modern day people use medication as a "get out of jail free" card meaning that they can smoke, drink and eat whatever and whenever they like.
Responding to a question with another question is not an answer - it is a dodge. I am not going to indulge you until you directly respond to my inquiries. This is a dishonest debating tactic and you should avoid it in the future.
You can't understand that todays world gives the appearance of being better when it isn't
You can't understand that saying this does not make it true. because it is a subject on which I am authority, let's examine my life as a case study. If I were to live 100 years ago, my father would be dead and my sister would have miscarried her twins. I would probably never have had the opportunity to attend school at all, as my family is not well off, and college would have been even more out of reach. I would likely already be married, a mother (quite possibly to a dead child), and working a menial job to support my family. I would not be allowed to vote and I would be considered an inferior being to my husband.
As it is, my father is alive, my nieces are alive, I am able to attend college full time, I have all the rights that my boyfriend has and I have much more freedom and flexibility with my career and my future plans because I do not have any children thanks to birth control. I am going to take advantage of my opportunity to get an excellent education, travel overseas, and study primatology and evolutionary psychology. I owe all these opportunities to modern developments in transportation, civil rights, science and technology in general.
My life is by no means unique. Every woman and every minority (in developed countries like US and Britain) is better off than they would have been 100 years ago purely by virtue of experiencing less institutionalized discrimination. Poor people have more government support and rich people have exponentially more money and luxuries on which to spend their vast wealth. Children die less, people live longer, and we have more choices, comforts, and opportunities. What people do with their freedoms may not always be ideal, but they are there.
If you want to live in the 1900s, thanks to modern technology, you someday can. Use the internet to research a place that is 100 years behind the rest of the world, use an airplane to get there, and there you are.
Now babies don't only die in childbirth we kill them as well
Babies do die in childbirth, but it is extremely rare in developed countries, and they are also much safer from disease in infancy and early childhood. Do not ignore this.
Abortion and losing a child to a curable disease are different.
Are you one of those posh rich kids who ignore everything they don't want to see?
While it's not good to be poor and I don't think anyone deserves it, the US currently takes better care of its poor than they did 100 years ago. Hitting me with an irrelevant insult does nothing to change this.
I am not using an emotionally appealing editorial as the basis for my argument, good try though. There have been dozens of sources offered by me and others in this debate, so go look at a couple of those.
All your sources prove is that those things exist. Great.
Biological warfare - covered this. Don't support it, but medicine has done an enormous amount of good for the human race as well.
I support a citizens' right to bodily autonomy so the abortion debate is not going to work here either.
As for poverty - what shape do you think humanitarianism was in 100 years ago? How many people, percentage-wise, do you think were starving in Africa and other countries 100 years ago, when the quality of life was hugely lower even in developed countries like the US and Britain? Think about the aid that is offered to countries today - inadequate, clearly, but substantial - both in the form of raw goods like food, and sustainable efforts like permanent sources of clean water and education about farming techniques and family planning. Imagine how impossible such efforts would have been a century ago.
"Responding to a question with another question is not an answer - it is a dodge. I am not going to indulge you until you directly respond to my inquiries. This is a dishonest debating tactic and you should avoid it in the future. "
being stubborn and aggressive is a dishonest debating tactic and you should avoid it in future.
i will go with your demands and supply an answer as long as you finally get back to proper debating:
I think that it was good that a full education was unattainable for most people
"You can't understand that saying this does not make it true. because it is a subject on which I am authority, let's examine my life as a case study. If I were to live 100 years ago, my father would be dead"
How would he have died?
" and my sister would have miscarried her twins."
at least we won't be over populated
" I would probably never have had the opportunity to attend school at all,"
No you would have just been taught the stuff you needed to know by your mother
" as my family is not well off, and college would have been even more out of reach."
then you could have gone out make friends and have fun like a real person
"I would likely already be married,"
Good now you got a life long meal ticket
" a mother (quite possibly to a dead child),"
Good, one less mouth to feed
" and working a menial job to support my family."
whats wrong with that, you'd be better off than the 2.03 million unemployed people (in the U.K)
"I would not be allowed to vote and I would be considered an inferior being to my husband. "
you would also have less responsibility to your husband.
Too be fair I am male so all the sentimental feminine things you previously stated mean nothing to me.Also this is a large exaggeration of what actually happened.
Everything you've previously said still happens they just don't tell you.
"As it is, my father is alive, my nieces are alive,"
What a waste of resources
"I am able to attend college full time,"
Unlike the millions who won't be able to due to student fee rises(U.K)
" I have all the rights that my boyfriend has and I have much more freedom and flexibility with my career"
I have nothing against rights and freedom apart from the fact that it attracts immigrants
" and my future plans because I do not have any children thanks to birth control"
Or you could just kill them when you forget to use a condom.
"I am going to take advantage of my opportunity to get an excellent education"
An opportunity few countries get
" travel overseas, "
why is your own country that terrible
"and study primatology and evolutionary psychology. "
Good for you(I find it really funny how you assume this is what is going to happen as there are so many factors that could change your life)
According to spell check "primotology" isn't a real word
"I owe all these opportunities to modern developments in transportation, civil rights, science and technology in general. "
Developments that allow people to create cleaner, faster and deadlier weapons.
Science that allows company's to inject chemicals into our food to maximize profits
Technology that repeatedly encourages the average citizen to stay at home and use
Transportation that gives the government a longer arm of control
Civil rights that are a mask which the real government hides behind
"My life is by no means unique. Every woman and every minority (in developed countries like US and Britain) is better off than they would have been 100 years ago purely by virtue of experiencing less institutionalized discrimination. "
To be fair everyone got treated like they had rights (in Britain) but it just wasn't forced.
"Poor people have more government support"
rewarding the lazy
" and rich people have exponentially more money and luxuries"
The increase of how much life costs
" on which to spend their vast wealth."
That will disappear when your country goes bust
"Children die less,"
They grow up not being happy that they are alive but believing that they won't die until they are 70.
" people live longer,"
Modern day people use medication as a "get out of jail free" card meaning that they can smoke, drink and eat whatever and whenever they like.(i have repeated this because you didn't reply to it in your last argument even though you quoted it this is a dishonest debating tactic and shouldn't be used ever)
" and we have more choices, comforts, and opportunities."
the choice of which shop we go to is going downhill as giant conglomerates monopolies the world market.You must be one of the gullible fools who believe that you have a range of options
" What people do with their freedoms may not always be ideal, but they are there."
In the 1900's people had a good sense of morals and beliefs if a child did wrong the parent would punish them, now they side with their child against the law
"If you want to live in the 1900s, thanks to modern technology, you someday can. Use the Internet to research a place that is 100 years behind the rest of the world, use an airplane to get there, and there you are. "
modern day technology is a great thing, but what you can't get back was the attitudes and the way of life that had supported society.
"Babies do die in childbirth, but it is extremely rare in developed countries, and they are also much safer from disease in infancy and early childhood. Do not ignore this.
Abortion and losing a child to a curable disease are different. "
of course I know they're different:
Abortion you don't want a baby so you just kill it
Death in childbirth if you couldn't afford the medication you probably couldn't afford the baby
"While it's not good to be poor and I don't think anyone deserves it, the US currently takes better care of its poor than they did 100 years ago. Hitting me with an irrelevant insult does nothing to change this."
Your country is a disgrace it took them 100 years to know how to take better care of its poor and they still have to pay for medication.
"Biological warfare - covered this. Don't support it, but medicine has done an enormous amount of good for the human race as well."
Your U.S government like to keep the balance of world population for every U.S citizens life they've saved they've kill in another country
"I support a citizens' right to bodily autonomy so the abortion debate is not going to work here either. "
Your entire argument is not gong to work as it is your personal experience which nobody could prove and any other facts you have made haven't been supported at all, in fact you haven't quoted a single source in this whole debate.
This is a dishonest debating tactic and you should avoid it in the future.
"As for poverty - what shape do you think humanitarianism was in 100 years ago? How many people, percentage-wise, do you think were starving in Africa and other countries 100 years ago, when the quality of life was hugely lower even in developed countries like the US and Britain? Think about the aid that is offered to countries today - inadequate, clearly, but substantial - both in the form of raw goods like food, and sustainable efforts like permanent sources of clean water and education about farming techniques and family planning. Imagine how impossible such efforts would have been a century ago.
"
In the 1900s every country in the world had its ups and downs equally
In todays world the U.S is the best in everything and loves to tell everyone that that's how it is.
being stubborn and aggressive is a dishonest debating tactic and you should avoid it in future.
i will go with your demands and supply an answer as long as you finally get back to proper debating:
I think that it was good that a full education was unattainable for most people
Try not to get your feelings hurt when someone calls you out on your juvenile bullshit. You avoided answering a question, I told you not to do that because it's a shitty way to debate, and refused to indulge you until you had given a direct answer. Pretty simple. We can move on now.
As for your question, I attended public school and it is far from perfect but thank god all children have the opportunity to attend it, and, if nothing else, learn basic literacy and math skills.
What are the advantages of education being unattainable for anyone? How is it beneficial for society in general to have less basically educated people in it?
How would he have died?
The medical technology that is used to treat his condition were not available 100 years ago.
at least we won't be over populated
I agree that population growth is a problem, but the alternative is not to encourage stillbirths via lack of medical care. Your hypocrisy is astounding; one moment you are lamenting the existence of abortion, the next you are promoting stillbirth and miscarriage as good things.
No you would have just been taught the stuff you needed to know by your mother
And what exactly would those things be? You are no authority on what people 'need to know', especially since you seem to set the bar extremely low, considering your apparent disdain for any education at all.
My mother is not a scientist of any caliber so I doubt she has much to teach me in my field of choice.
then you could have gone out make friends and have fun like a real person
How did you deduce that I have no friends and I do not enjoy my life, simply because I attend college? You truly are an amazing mind reader with an impressive ability to discern unrelated assumptions from any fact presented!
Good now you got a life long meal ticket
I'd rather succeed on my own merits. Also, your statement assumes that we would not be living hand to mouth, with both of us having to work. Considering the economic strata my boyfriend and I were both born into, this is probably what would happen.
Good, one less mouth to feed
Again, hypocritical and callous. Are you not taking into consideration at all the suffering people endure when they lose a child, and how much of that suffering has been avoided today? Abortion results in one less mouth to feed but you won't quit whining about that.
whats wrong with that, you'd be better off than the 2.03 million unemployed people (in the U.K)
The idea of working in substandard conditions for a substandard wage so that I do not starve is not an attractive prospect.
you would also have less responsibility to your husband.
What do you mean by this?
Too be fair I am male so all the sentimental feminine things you previously stated mean nothing to me.Also this is a large exaggeration of what actually happened.
I like how being grateful that my family members are not dead is a 'sentimental feminine thing'. If the prospect of having one of your family members die an early, preventable death doesn't make you sad, it's not because you're male, it's because you're a sociopath.
What a waste of resources
They are just as deserving of resources as any other person on the planet.
Unlike the millions who won't be able to due to student fee rises(U.K)
This is unfortunate, but irrelevant unless they would have been better off 100 years ago. Doubt it.
I have nothing against rights and freedom apart from the fact that it attracts immigrants
The early 1900s saw one of the biggest influx of immigrants in American history. I realize things were probably fairly different in Britain, but I am largely arguing for the improvement in America, because I know more about this. It seems there are and were many other similarities between US and Britain, though.
Or you could just kill them when you forget to use a condom.
I sure could and I probably would, on the off chance that my birth control fails. I am grateful that I have this option. One less mouth to feed, right?
Additionally, abortion was around in 1900, too and plenty of people took advantage of it. It's safer today, of course.
An opportunity few countries get
An opportunity that is available in more places than it was a century ago.
why is your own country that terrible
Why do I need to hate my own country in order to want o see the rest of the world?
Good for you(I find it really funny how you assume this is what is going to happen as there are so many factors that could change your life)
100 years ago I would haven no chance of getting anywhere close to my current goals. As it is, I am already on the path with school and internships. Plans may change but I'm already further along that I could have been.
According to spell check "primotology" isn't a real word
Honey, that's because you spelled it wrong.
You continue to ignore all the lives that science and technology has saved and improved and all the knowledge we now have about the world that we didn't have before. Yes, it is not ideal that these things exist, but they are only one side of the coin. The world was by no means a safer, happier, healthier place before they came along.
To be fair everyone got treated like they had rights (in Britain) but it just wasn't forced.
"It was not uncommon to see signs in Britain during the 1960s proclaiming, “No blacks, no Irish, no dogs”
If this is what things were like only 50 years ago, what do you think things were like more than a century ago?
rewarding the lazy
Also preventing citizens from starving.
The increase of how much life costs
This is not a complete sentence. Please feel free to finish it so your argument makes sense.
That will disappear when your country goes bust
If it will happen, it hasn't happened yet. We are comparing the 1900s with the present, no the 1900s with the future. Stay on track here.
They grow up not being happy that they are alive but believing that they won't die until they are 70.
Please show me the statistic that contrasts the rate of happiness among children today with the rates of happiness among children 100 years ago.
I am not denying that people today could live better lives, but life was not magically better 100 years ago. It was less safe, less healthy, there was more discrimination and more restrictions. People tend to romanticize the past and that is what is happening here; you either are ignorant about or ignoring the terrible state of many peoples' lives.
Modern day people use medication as a "get out of jail free" card meaning that they can smoke, drink and eat whatever and whenever they like.(i have repeated this because you didn't reply to it in your last argument even though you quoted it this is a dishonest debating tactic and shouldn't be used ever)
My, what a short memory you have. To quote from the post where I did indeed answer this:
"They also use it to not die when they get cancer and other disease, through no fault of their own. Even if people fall victim to vices such as smoking and drinking (which also existed 100 years ago, by the way, and people were far more ignorant about their negative effects) they do not deserve to be punished by a slow, painful death, nor do their families and friends deserve to suffer their loss."
the choice of which shop we go to is going downhill as giant conglomerates monopolies the world market.You must be one of the gullible fools who believe that you have a range of options
What makes you think I am only talking about places to shop? While it is true that places to shop are currently more varied, this is far from the only or the most important choices that have expanded for people today.
In the 1900's people had a good sense of morals and beliefs if a child did wrong the parent would punish them, now they side with their child against the law
Do you think that crime was invented in the 1950s or something? There has always been rape, murder, thievery, spoiled children and immoral people, in any and every time period.
The crime rates may be higher today than they were a century ago. It seems, at least in some areas, they were. If so, then this is an arena where the 1900s was indeed superior - however, the amount of innocent people that were saved through medical technology probably outnumber crime victims by the millions.
Abortion you don't want a baby so you just kill it
Yep, that's the gist of it, except a fetus and a baby are not the same thing. Bodily autonomy is awesome, isn't it?
Death in childbirth if you couldn't afford the medication you probably couldn't afford the baby
How much money would a person need in order to buy medication that hasn't been invented yet?
Your country is a disgrace it took them 100 years to know how to take better care of its poor and they still have to pay for medication.
This debate is not called: 'Has it taken America too long to care for its poor?' and I am not trying to say the system is perfect or that it ever was. Just that it is better than it was.
Also, I am interested to see the sources that show how wonderful British impoverished people were doing 100 years ago.
Your entire argument is not gong to work as it is your personal experience which nobody could prove and any other facts you have made haven't been supported at all, in fact you haven't quoted a single source in this whole debate.
This is a dishonest debating tactic and you should avoid it in the future.
Short memory at work again, huh? Look around a little harder, like at my very first post in this debate, among others.
In the 1900s every country in the world had its ups and downs equally
Source please? This seems extremely unlikely.
In todays world the U.S is the best in everything and loves to tell everyone that that's how it is.
Sure, fine, I'm not crazy about the attitude a lot of us have either. Doesn't change the fact that for our citizens, life quality and length has skyrocketed in the past century. Britain's too.
"Try not to get your feelings hurt when someone calls you out on your juvenile bullshit. You avoided answering a question, I told you not to do that because it's a shitty way to debate, and refused to indulge you until you had given a direct answer. Pretty simple. We can move on now. "
Who said my feelings are hurt. You truly are an amazing mind reader with an impressive ability to discern unrelated assumptions from any fact presented!
Try not to get your feelings hurt when someone gets fed up with your annoying stubbornness.I answer your question in a format you weren't expecting, You then started to moan that you couldn't understand that type of sentance and wanted it in a more simpler form.Pretty simple. We can move on now.
"As for your question, I attended public school and it is far from perfect but thank god all children have the opportunity to attend it, and, if nothing else, learn basic literacy and math skills. "
Basic skills their own parents are unable to teach them?
"What are the advantages of education being unattainable for anyone? How is it beneficial for society in general to have less basically educated people in it? "
I said a full education. If a father (e.g a butcher) taught his son his trade (e.g butching) then the son could take over the shop afterwards and earn an easy living.
"The medical technology that is used to treat his condition were not available 100 years ago."
Once again you are not giving me the full picture. What is his condition? Is he an alcoholic? (if it is a mental condition which you might be ashamed to mention I won't press the matter any further)
"I agree that population growth is a problem, but the alternative is not to encourage stillbirths via lack of medical care. Your hypocrisy is astounding; one moment you are lamenting the existence of abortion, the next you are promoting stillbirth and miscarriage as good things."
there is a difference between death(miscarriage) and murder(abortion).The fact that abortion is legal in todays world isn't right.
"And what exactly would those things be? You are no authority on what people 'need to know', especially since you seem to set the bar extremely low, considering your apparent disdain for any education at all."
How to cook, clean look after children and generally be a good housewife.
You might also be taught basic mathematics(numbers) and literacy (the alphabet)
"My mother is not a scientist of any caliber so I doubt she has much to teach me in my field of choice."
The modern day person expects to get want they want, this disgusts me. why can't you just not get a job and become a housewife
"How did you deduce that I have no friends and I do not enjoy my life, simply because I attend college? "
Because you are on the internet daily talking to people you don't know.
"You truly are an amazing mind reader with an impressive ability to discern unrelated assumptions from any fact presented! "
You assume I beleive I can read minds just because I can see a stereotype.
"I'd rather succeed on my own merits. Also, your statement assumes that we would not be living hand to mouth, with both of us having to work. Considering the economic strata my boyfriend and I were both born into, this is probably what would happen."
If you could name any case in the early 1900s (preferably in Britain) where both husband and wife had to work I will happily take this as a valid point.
Not much different in your "great" U.S.A you say people can have "freedom of speach" in the constitution but when some (wikileaks manager) publishes something you don't like you get him transported to your country to kill him.
First of all, I am not only an American citizen but also a Brazilian citizen, and Argentine citizen. Do not assume that I hold the US in perfect lighting.
Second, I did not mention anything about freedom of speech. I personally think that Julian Assage is aggressively accused of rape so that he may be kept in captivity (not killed).
I am not saying that everything is perfect. People are still put in jail unfairly. But can you even compare
Hacking into national-security files and leaking them out to the entire nation, which is being met with no direct charge, and only pressuring an unrelated charge that has been taken to another country for fear of an unfair trial
relative to:
versus printing out 15,000 leaflets and sending them out, and was sentenced to 6 months in jail by the Supreme Court for doing so
who cares it's not like people spend any time reading anymore
Do you even know what illiterate means?
in those times when a husband and wife got marrried they used to decide together, so therefore a husbands vote also included that of the wife. In the modern day if a married couple don't agree they just get divorced.
i really liked that you took the time to post this. i agree fully. everything is made out to be bigger and better but really if you stand back and compare these advancements bring out a new way to be mean. there is more anger and hate and now there is a way to be mean to someone without saying it to thereface. cyberbullying is an increasing problem and there is no way to stop it.
Now that homosexuality is not just decriminalized but legally supported, and blacks can go to the same schools as whites, and women can run for office - narrower viewpoints?!??!?!?!
We spend more, but have less.
I dunno. We sure seem to have a lot of useless junk. I for one am proud to say that my money goes only to useful items: books. Surely most people waste a lot of money buying things they don't need, but isn't that was (I think it was) Max Weber complain, as well as Marx, about capitalism? Makes lots of stuff you don't need.
We have bigger houses and smaller families.
Well, we've gotta have somewhere to put all our useless junk!
We have more degrees but less sense.
Less sense than the people who believed in blooding for fever, astrology was still believed, that masturbation was evidence of mental illness!
Come now...
Everything you say is the result of watching too much Waltons and Little House on the Prairie. Stop watching TV and pick up a non-fiction book on the period, you'll probably change your opinion.
I would gladly forgo all modern convenience if I could be transported back through time a hundred years. People enjoyed freedom back then and were a lot less neurotic. People had more common sense and less indoctrination. The dollar was actually worth something and you got to keep what you earned. The government was small and not an Orwellian nightmare. The food was real and not genetically-modified and sprayed with toxins. You could smoke a joint or take a little cocaine without a swat team kicking in your door and screaming at you with guns to your head. Modern times suck. Nowadays, it's just a bunch of brain-dead gimps with no morals and no guts, just spending their lives chirping away on their cellphones.
People enjoyed freedom back then and were a lot less neurotic.
Only if you were a white, wealthy male. If you were anything else, you were second class.
The government was small and not an Orwellian nightmare.
Lynch mobs and conspiring zealots too the place of big government in making everyone miserable.
The food was real and not genetically-modified and sprayed with toxins.
Only sometimes it would itself be toxic, as in radioactive or full of lead and arsenic.
You could smoke a joint or take a little cocaine without a swat team kicking in your door and screaming at you with guns to your head.
Mostly because we had no idea what these drugs did, and wondered why people had heart attacks at a young age.
Modern times suck. Nowadays, it's just a bunch of brain-dead gimps with no morals and no guts, just spending their lives chirping away on their cellphones.
Modern times suck. You cannot die from polio, tetanus, smallpox, etc. any longer.
Only if you were a white, wealthy male. If you were anything else, you were second class.
Well, according to your previous posts, nothing has changed and blacks are still second class, that's why they are excused for making racist remarks while whites are ostracized for the same, remember? Please stop contradicting yourself.
Anyways, I contend that blacks were better off 100 years ago, despite not having every single right that whites possessed. Blacks are now the victims of liberal programs which have them warehoused in inner-city projects that resemble Third World countries. Blacks are more angry than ever at whites thanks to liberal propaganda which has instilled in them a "victim consciousness" far more effectively than having separate toilets ever did.
Lynch mobs and conspiring zealots too the place of big government in making everyone miserable.
Where do you get this shit? There was the occasional lynch mob, sure, but you are totally blowing things out of proportion by stating that it took the place of big government and made everyone miserable. You have an idiotic, warped view of history. That kind of delusional thinking reminds me of the idiotic conservatives who are afraid to go to the mall because they think a terrorist lurks around every corner. It's just plain stupid. Anyways, there are now FAR more blacks in prison per capita than any time in history. Get an education.
Mostly because we had no idea what these drugs did, and wondered why people had heart attacks at a young age
We had an idea of what those drugs did because they were commonly used in medicine. They were not illegal because it would have been thought a strange idea to violate the Constitution by making a plant illegal. The notion of making Nature against the law would have been a foreign idea because people did not think like a bunch of totalitarian assholes back then.
Modern times suck. You cannot die from polio, tetanus, smallpox, etc. any longer .
But you can die from cancer, heart disease, stroke, diabetes and a host of other diseases which have absolutely SKYROCKETED in the last 100 years...SKYROCKETED.
Well, according to your previous posts, nothing has changed and blacks are still second class, that's why they are excused for making racist remarks while whites are ostracized for the same, remember? Please stop contradicting yourself.
Nothing has changed? Segregation has ended. Interracial and interfaith marriages are legal. Minorities may work as more than labourers, and own successful businesses, and work in politics.
In the 1900s if a black man tried to run for president, the most tolerant people would probably say, "I don't think coloureds should have so much power." The typical person would say, "A nigger for president? Not in this land!" and the most violent would try to lynch the man as an example to keep other "niggers" in line.
Now we just have fringe racists that we mostly ignore because they lack power, and we use policies like affirmative action to offset the advantage that white males have in the nation as a majority.
Anyways, I contend that blacks were better off 100 years ago, despite not having every single right that whites possessed. Blacks are now the victims of liberal programs which have them warehoused in inner-city projects that resemble Third World countries. Blacks are more angry than ever at whites thanks to liberal propaganda which has instilled in them a "victim consciousness" far more effectively than having separate toilets ever did.
Do you know how the ghettos formed? When blacks and minorities moved into neighborhoods, whites would leave the area in a phenomenon known as "white flight."
As for your statement that blacks were better off 100 years ago. I don't really care to address such wanton stupidity.
Where do you get this shit? There was the occasional lynch mob, sure, but you are totally blowing things out of proportion by stating that it took the place of big government and made everyone miserable.
Back in those old days the Ku Klux Klan had a grip in the southern states in particular, and it was common practice to put blacks into their place as second-class animals. They would ride in nights, assault and murder blacks in order to intimidate the minority and keep it in fear. In those days if you were black, you were second-class, and if you tried to stand against this in any way by voting or acting equal with white men or women, you would be retaliated against, probably murdered.
Anyways, there are now FAR more blacks in prison per capita than any time in history. Get an education.
These are examples of how the sentiments of the time so long ago mirrored what we see now with other drugs.
But you can die from cancer, heart disease, stroke, diabetes and a host of other diseases which have absolutely SKYROCKETED in the last 100 years...SKYROCKETED.
I'd rather die from "cancer, heart disease, stroke, diabetes" than smallpox or tetanus. Do you even know what these are? The first covers your body in sores, the other excretes a toxin into your muscle tissue which causes it to contract permanently, meaning that you die in a contorted and painful position.
Fucking dickweed posted Reefer Madness as a source, that came out in the late 30's you ignorant schmuck, not the early 1900's. The drug war phenomenon came from a piece of shit propagandist like yourself named Harry Anslinger.
Fucking dickweed posted Reefer Madness as a source, that came out in the late 30's you ignorant schmuck, not the early 1900's. The drug war phenomenon came from a piece of shit propagandist like yourself named Harry Anslinger.
I suppose if you bothered to read about the temperance movement and the cannabis scare, you'd realise that anti-drug sentiment existed far back to the turn of the century. I did not say that Reefer Madness occurred in the 1900s, just that it illustrated how drug fear isn't a new thing.
Enlightened1, i thought you had a little more class than that, i guess since your angry, it can be overlooked. Oh, and life in the early 1900's was a much better time, even in the depressions. a box of corn flakes cost $0.80, that was considered a large amount. Do you see the difference in the economy?
Has it? Big deal, institutionalized segregation has ended, but people still self-segregate. If you deny this, you must live under a rock.
Interracial and interfaith marriages are legal.
Was prohibition against such marriages really a big thing? No. Both blacks and whites were and still are largely against interracial marriage...no big milestone there, either.
Minorities may work as more than labourers, and own successful businesses, and work in politics.
Nothing prevented blacks from owning businesses and they did so.
Now we just have fringe racists that we mostly ignore because they lack power, and we use policies like affirmative action to offset the advantage that white males have in the nation as a majority.
You think two wrongs make a right, I don't...just a matter of opinion ,there.
Do you know how the ghettos formed? When blacks and minorities moved into neighborhoods, whites would leave the area in a phenomenon known as "white flight ."
It still happens today, liberals never take this into account? If you are going to blame whites for moving away from black neighborhoods, please move to South Central LA and tell me how you like it, no matter what race or combo of races you are.
Back in those old days the Ku Klux Klan had a grip in the southern states in particular, and it was common practice to put blacks into their place as second-class animals.
The likelihood that any particular black person would suffer at the hands of the Ku Kux Klan in their lifetime was extremely slim. Most blacks lived lives of content alongside their white neighbors. You remind me of the Neo-Cons who try to convince us all that suicide bombers are around every corner and we should all be on alert and report suspicious persons...you're a fucking idiot.
What's more, asshole? Wikipedia links? I didn't even click your weak links because if I had posted Wikipedia links myself you would attempt to laugh me off this site. I have you figured out, now. You just read a lot of bullshit with a liberal bias, you aren't that intelligent or knowledgeable at all.
Was prohibition against such marriages really a big thing? No. Both blacks and whites were and still are largely against interracial marriage...no big milestone there, either.
You think two wrongs make a right, I don't...just a matter of opinion ,there.
Bigots try to claim that they are fighting discrimination by ending affirmative action, but the intended effect is that the latent prejudice in favour of white males will give a competitive advantage to them once again.
It still happens today, liberals never take this into account? If you are going to blame whites for moving away from black neighborhoods, please move to South Central LA and tell me how you like it, no matter what race or combo of races you are.
White flight is part of what causes modern segregated communities. It is the answer to your statement earlier:
Blacks are now the victims of liberal programs which have them warehoused in inner-city projects that resemble Third World countries.
The likelihood that any particular black person would suffer at the hands of the Ku Kux Klan in their lifetime was extremely slim. Most blacks lived lives of content alongside their white neighbors. You remind me of the Neo-Cons who try to convince us all that suicide bombers are around every corner and we should all be on alert and report suspicious persons...you're a fucking idiot.
This statement is called a half truth. In terms of population it would be considered uncommon to be targeted because thousands of murdered blacks compared to a population of hundreds of thousands or even millions made it statistically unlikely but the full truth is that these rates of violence were obscenely high as compared to times when the Klan was ended in its political influence. It also conceals that the Klan would target blacks who stood out, meaning that if you were a political activist or behaved equal to a white man, you would be killed very possibly.
What's more, asshole? Wikipedia links? I didn't even click your weak links because if I had posted Wikipedia links myself you would attempt to laugh me off this site. I have you figured out, now. You just read a lot of bullshit with a liberal bias, you aren't that intelligent or knowledgeable at all.
Blah blah. I wish I could make excuses for ignoring debate points like you just did. I have a conscience however, and a sense of pride.
Think about this for a second and be realistic. People have to die sometime, and something has to cause that death.
Modern medical science has almost wiped polio, tetanus, and pneumonia off the map as causes of death. Life expectancy has been extended by more than two decades. These achievements are sarcastically brushed off, and you agree?
I'll ask again since I didn't get an answer from thewayitis. What would be an improvement big enough to convince you medicine is one of the many things that is better today than 100 years ago? Cures for all diseases? No causes of death ever?
The reason I haven't answered you, is that I only get on the computer a couple of times a week.
I read a lot about history, because history always repeats its' self. Let me point out an example of how history does this and you decide which is better.
In the early 1900's there where company towns, you worked for them, they gave you a place to live and credit at the company store. They owned you because the goods where over priced, rent was high and pay was little. You had a job, food and employment.
Today, company towns are gone and you are indebted to credit card companies. They don't employ you, they don't feed you, and they don't give you a place to live. In fact they only care about collecting their money.
Which is better? There are many people that cannot manage their own paycheck and end up losing their job. They loose their house and end up at a shelter or being taken care of at the taxpayers expense. The truth about company towns is they never expected you to pay your debt to them. They were looking out for their interest and that of its' employees. Big deal, we now have a choice who to be in-debt to.
The reason I haven't answered you, is that I only get on the computer a couple of times a week.
Nice try but this is in a post you already responded to. The reason you didn't answer me is because you ignored most of my post in favor of an irrelevant and convoluted statement that did not disprove anything. Like you often do.
In the early 1900's there where company towns, you worked for them, they gave you a place to live and credit at the company store. They owned you because the goods where over priced, rent was high and pay was little. You had a job, food and employment.
Today, company towns are gone and you are indebted to credit card companies. They don't employ you, they don't feed you, and they don't give you a place to live. In fact they only care about collecting their money.
Which is better? There are many people that cannot manage their own paycheck and end up losing their job. They loose their house and end up at a shelter or being taken care of at the taxpayers expense. The truth about company towns is they never expected you to pay your debt to them. They were looking out for their interest and that of its' employees. Big deal, we now have a choice who to be in-debt to..
Even if I wasn't going to elaborate, and even if that were the only difference between today and the 1900s, I would absolutely say that while both situations suck, the second one is vastly preferable. This one, at the very least, allows a person to shop where they want; if they wish, this means they can subsist on lower-priced goods and few luxuries until their debt is under control.
Anyway, people do not need to rack up endless debt to survive†. Just because most people do not manage their money doesn't mean they can't . In the modern world, they have the choice to avoid debt or manage it well when do they have it, or not.
†= The exception is, of course, impoverished people. In this case, I still hold that an incredibly impoverished person today, either accumulating debt, or in a shelter/on welfare as you stated, is better off than an incredibly impoverished person in the 1900s who might have starved to death.
If this was the case and I had been on-line and didn't reply, it is because I often don't reply to people that claim they know everything. What is the point?
In the early 1900's you wouldn't starve to death if you had the desire to work. One would feed you and let you sleep in the barn in exchange for a few chores. This was not taking advantage of someone because they had enough pride not to want a handout. This was an exchange that saved face on all parties. Today, people just want a handout. Today is so much better.
If this was the case and I had been on-line and didn't reply, it is because I often don't reply to people that claim they know everything. What is the point?
For the love of God, work on your reading comprehension skills. I repeated the question to Axemeister because you did reply but you ignored most of my post, including that question. This is something you do a lot.
In the early 1900's you wouldn't starve to death if you had the desire to work. One would feed you and let you sleep in the barn in exchange for a few chores. This was not taking advantage of someone because they had enough pride not to want a handout.
Can't find a source on this. I'm sure it happened, perhaps quite often, but the data that is available regarding unemployment, poverty, and hunger is a lot less cheerful than that the picture you paint. A big chunk of the population lived in the crowded cities without access to the rustic, idyllic farmsteads of which you speak; plenty of them did not speak English; and many had giant families to feed, clothe, and shelter as well. Don't forget that a large part of my argument rests on abundant racism, sexism, and disease, as well as a lack of education and opportunity in the 1900s.
-In 1900, if a mother had four children, there was a fifty-fifty chance that one would die before the age of 5. At the same time, half of all young people lost a parent before they reached the age of 21.
-In 1900, the average family had an annual income of $3,000 (in today's dollars). The family had no indoor plumbing, no phone, and no car. About half of all American children lived in poverty. Most teens did not attend school; instead, they labored in factories or fields.
-The latter part of the 19th century was an era of tuberculosis, typhoid, sanitariums, child labor, 12-hour work days, tenements, and outhouses. In 1900, more Americans died from tuberculosis than from cancer. Each day millions of horses deposited some 25 pounds of manure and urine on city streets.
-In rural areas, many people were poor. In inner cities, over-worked factory workers lived in crowded and unsanitary tenements.
-At the turn of the century, three quarters of the states forbade married women to have property in their own name. In these states a woman's property became her husband's upon marriage. In a third of the states, a woman's earnings belonged to her husband. And in all states except Wyoming, Utah, Colorado and Idaho, women were not allowed to vote.
-Because of Comstock's influence, it became illegal for people to discuss birth control, including a doctor with a patient. It became illegal for a library to have a book on contraception.
I don't currently have the time to go thru all the BS that you posted. Are your grand parents still around? Ask them or anybody in there late 80's or 90's which is better, they won't say it is today.
I don't currently have the time to go thru all the BS that you posted.
If you think third-party reports based on research and facts that inconveniently contradict your argument are BS...then I guess that explains a lot about your debating style.
Are your grand parents still around? Ask them or anybody in there late 80's or 90's which is better, they won't say it is today.
Considering modern medical technology is the reason my father and my two nieces did not die in infancy, I doubt my grandparents would say such a thing.
"Think about this for a second and be realistic. People have to die sometime, and something has to cause that death. "
So why do you keep coomplaing that the 1900s were full of diseases.
"Modern medical science has almost wiped polio, tetanus, and pneumonia off the map as causes of death. Life expectancy has been extended by more than two decades. These achievements are sarcastically brushed off, and you agree? "
Mordern medical science has also create new diseases to wipe out other countries(political term: biological weapons)
"I'll ask again since I didn't get an answer from thewayitis. What would be an improvement big enough to convince you medicine is one of the many things that is better today than 100 years ago? Cures for all diseases? No causes of death ever?"
No i think disease and death are some of the things that get rid of all the people thick enough to shove McDonalds down their throat daily.
Modern day people use medication as a "get out of jail free" card meaning that they can smoke, drink and eat whatever and whenever they like.
So why do you keep coomplaing that the 1900s were full of diseases.
Uh, because they were? Infant mortality rates were huge because of disease that are now curable. You can ramble on about how bad abortion is, but there is a huge difference between a woman voluntarily exterminating a fetus, and a couple suffering the loss of a child because of disease. If you don't believe this, try talking to a woman who voluntarily underwent and abortion, then talk to a woman who lost an infant due to SIDs or something.
Mordern medical science has also create new diseases to wipe out other countries(political term: biological weapons)
Are you arguing that it is preferable that modern medicine not exist, because its results have not been 100% dedicated to the betterment of humanity? I agree that biological weapons are a negative development, but you cannot ignore the millions if not billions of lives it has saved, improved, or prolonged over the past 100 years.
No i think disease and death are some of the things that get rid of all the people thick enough to shove McDonalds down their throat daily.
This does not really answer my question about what you consider a suitable improvement in the field of medicine. In fact, it doesn't really address anything I said, as I did not bring up the purpose or function of disease in general. I also do not think that people who made poor dietary choices deserve death.
Modern day people use medication as a "get out of jail free" card meaning that they can smoke, drink and eat whatever and whenever they like.
They also use it to not die when they get cancer and other disease, through no fault of their own. Even if people fall victim to vices such as smoking and drinking (which also existed 100 years ago, by the way, and people were far more ignorant about their negative effects) they do not deserve to be punished by a slow, painful death, nor do their families and friends deserve to suffer their loss.
Like the middle class is anything but second class citizens. I suggest you leave your bubble and actually see the world.
Unless you live in a society with a wealth distribution system that is completely impartial, how can you avoid having citizens in varying income brackets?
Cancer, aids, kill you instead of polo, tetnus, etc. Big improvement.
The fact that science has made history of many formerly fatal diseases is a big improvement. What would be an acceptable 'big improvement' to you? Immortality? The human body eventually begins to decline in function and becomes more susceptible to illness and injury; this is inevitable. Better it be at 75 years than 50.
Live long and spend the last decade or two of your life locked up from the rest of society. We push for a long life and then send the elderly to nursing homes. To die with an ounce of dignity, only a pipe dream.
I would rather sit in a nursing home and live to watch my grandchildren graduate from college than die a few years after watching my children drop out of elementary school and get a job.
It's pointless to dispute me with nothing but a complaint about the modern world, because I am not claiming there are no problems with today's world. Really, I'm not. I'm just saying it's preferable to the world 100 years ago. Maybe people don't take advantage of opportunities they have, but at least today, they have them, and plenty of people do take advantage of them.
It is not a complaint, it is the way things are. I have nothing to do with how society treats it's elderly. Been to see anybody in a rest-home lately? If you enter there with any mind at all, you won't have it for long. Imagine the only conversation you have is on the Internet, no contact elsewhere. Do you really think you would enjoy it?
Okay. Let's try simplifying our exchange up till now, and let's see if you can guess why it's not a productive conversation.
You: Life is shitty today.
Me: Life may be shitty today, but it was shittier 100 years ago.
You: But life is shitty today.
Me: Okay, but that doesn't change that it was still shittier 100 years ago.
You: But life is shitty today!
Did that help? Do you understand now how listing the things you don't like about today doesn't accomplish anything unless you accurately contrast them with how things were 100 years ago. You and many people on this side of the debate have an unrealistically positive view of what the 1900s were like, selectively remembering the good things and denying or ignoring the many, many horrible things.
Been to see anybody in a rest-home lately? If you enter there with any mind at all, you won't have it for long. Imagine the only conversation you have is on the Internet, no contact elsewhere. Do you really think you would enjoy it?
It's actually worse, because the children of those elderly often dump them there. One particularly sad story I remember was of this older lady I met at a care facility. Her children took her to this run-down home, they claimed it was during their vacation only, and she had dementia. What happened was that they were tired of caring for her and never came back back for her, as I recall they emptied her savings and she would often ask if they were back from vacation as if it all happened only weeks ago. She eventually died there.
I spent the night there talking to an older man who had a degenerative disease, he lived in a room beside the aforementioned lady. We talked about all sorts of things and I fixed his computer for him.
And you in the past (1900) had a crossed burned in your front yard and not in the present? You were not around then and taking somebody else's word these things happened takes faith. You are a believer. For disliking man's written words, you use them frequently enough.
Tell me about dying from tetanus. Having experienced it first hand and coming back into the word as an ass.
And you in the past (1900) had a crossed burned in your front yard and not in the present? You were not around then and taking somebody else's word these things happened takes faith. You are a believer. For disliking man's written words, you use them frequently enough.
I was born in 1890, in old Atlanta.
In seriousness, it is a well-documented claim. Try reading about it.
Tell me about dying from tetanus. Having experienced it first hand and coming back into the word as an ass.
It is like having a muscle cramp, but all over your body, and it contorts into the most awkward shape with severe spasms. You eventually die from asphyxiation, starvation, fluid in the lungs, or body stress/trauma.
I wrote this a couple of years ago and I think it states my opinion on this.
Broken Don’t Fix It
Is everything the way it should be in the world? I don't think so. Broken, don't fix it seems to be the universal policy of this country anyway. This policy is used again and again in everything around us. We used to fix things things when they quit, now we just buy a new one when it quits. Televisions, clothes washers, dryers, dishwashers, clocks, radios, lamps, lawn mowers, chairs and the list of disposable items is endless. I can remember having all of these things fixed, now the landfills and scrap yards are the undertakers of our belongings. When I was growing up, it was a big deal to buy an appliance. We packed into the car and drove 30 miles to purchase the latest addition to the family. Now the convenience of picking one up just around the corner and at a lot cheaper price, has made it an item of little or no importance to us as a family. It is no longer a member of the family and is no longer valued.
This broken, don't fix it attitude is everywhere, from the White House to the work place and even in the school yards. President Bush's, "ah duh stay the course" is no answer to anything and that seems to be the only answer for everything in Washington and everywhere else. I believe, the biggest enemy we have is ourselves. Winston Churchill once said, " The best argument against democracy is a five minute chat with the average voter." So far we seem to be doing a pretty good job of proving him right. Suggest a change to your boss or coworker and see with what openness they receive your suggestion to a problem or way to improve things. I dare you to verify this broken, don't fix it philosophy that is in place and prove me wrong. Be assertive, even a little aggressive and don't worry about losing your job, make your boss worry about losing his.
" Question every premise, challenge conventional wisdom, and never accept the truth of something merely because everyone else views it as obvious. Resist being credulous." These are words of wisdom given to Albert Einstein by his first employer Fredrich Haller. Einstein years later was still working off Haller's advise when quoted as saying," Blind respect for authority is the greatest enemy of truth." I tell you this, I have never had a job that is more important than doing the right thing or speaking my mind about how I think things should be done to improve things. If somebody's ego gets stepped on so be it. Nothing great has ever been done by playing it safe.
In the early nineteen hundreds great things were accomplished during the industrial revolution. The people of this era poured all that they had into changing the course of history. Most of them put body and soul into advancing their ideas and creating their inventions. Several of them lost their lives or were seriously injured doing what they loved. If it wasn't for this deep rooted passion, we would have no luxuries or conveniences. One of these courageous souls was R.G. Letourneau, poor fellow growing up, mechanically inclined, lived through a broken neck, started a business, brought revolutionary changes to the construction industry and ended up selling his company for 31 million dollars in 1951. This is just one of the many great men that transformed not only this country but the world forever. Since those days, we have done very little to change the world forever.
We have put limits on our imagination and discouraged the passionate from pursuing their dreams by demanding safety for all individuals. Setting up rules and regulations to protect those to stupid to protect themselves. OSHA is one of these, that have killed more than saved. Killed the desire to achieve greatness, stomped out passion, eliminated enthusiasm and saved a finger. Broken, don't fix it, won't cut it here. I'm afraid that we have taken out any excitement that could have been obtained from working and become mindless drones.
I speak of this, from someone that has tasted the thrill of being 100 feet up, blowing around in the wind like a chime ( no safety equipment ) and working in an open trench 20 feet down in the ground ( no safety equipment ) Don't pass judgment on me; motorcycle operator, skydiver, bungee jumper, smoker, drinker, pot head, drug user, amusement park junkie, and everybody else that likes the thrill of what they do. I have a right to complain my thrill is working, not an entertainment.
If I followed all of OSHA's rules I would be working in a padded room with a straight jacket on. The only thing wrong here, is that I take less risk then the majority of the population and have to abide by rules designed for morons. One thing that I know is that I won't offend anybody by writing this. For this simple reason if you are too stupid to keep your hand out of a machine, then I know you can't read this. As for me, I am broken beyond repair and would like to thank those that made this possible.
If I followed all of OSHA's rules I would be working in a padded room with a straight jacket on. The only thing wrong here, is that I take less risk then the majority of the population and have to abide by rules designed for morons. One thing that I know is that I won't offend anybody by writing this. For this simple reason if you are too stupid to keep your hand out of a machine, then I know you can't read this. As for me, I am broken beyond repair and would like to thank those that made this possible.
Institutions like OSHA were created because factories might explode suddenly, buildings might burst into flame, and machines were often completely without safeguards. It seems retarded now, but back at the turn of the last century people seemed unable to regulate themselves safely.
In the early nineteen hundreds great things were accomplished during the industrial revolution. The people of this era poured all that they had into changing the course of history. Most of them put body and soul into advancing their ideas and creating their inventions. Several of them lost their lives or were seriously injured doing what they loved. If it wasn't for this deep rooted passion, we would have no luxuries or conveniences. One of these courageous souls was R.G. Letourneau, poor fellow growing up, mechanically inclined, lived through a broken neck, started a business, brought revolutionary changes to the construction industry and ended up selling his company for 31 million dollars in 1951. This is just one of the many great men that transformed not only this country but the world forever. Since those days, we have done very little to change the world forever.
It's easy to champion a few great people who were innovators or persistent to the end, but recall that the vast majority worked in drudgery, or died.
Also remember that refrigerators weren't available in those days, which meant that you ate food that was more prone to spoilage, unless you had an ice box, dried or canned your food.
Medicine is not fufilling it's potentials the way it could.
In the 1900s children frequently died before maturity thanks to common diseases with no cures. Polio, smallpox, scarlet fever, amongst others frequently led to death. Today medicine has greatly increased our lifespans, and reduced the dangers of disease.
Big business and greed rules politics.
What makes you think 1900 was any different?
Humanity and humanitarianism is fading.
Back in those days, there was a prevailing attitude amongst the British that the poor deserved their poverty. Today we need only look at the victims in Haiti, to see an example of how the western world contributed towards helping those people. Modern technology made that possible.
Materialism is more important than human life.
What do you think the Industrial Revolution was?
We are destroying our environment.
In 1900 we were destroying our environment but nobody cared or knew it.
We still have war.
As long as humanity exists, war will.
Abortion is legal, and prevention is ignored. ("OK to kill" attitude)
As opposed to having dead babies and miscarriages, and half of your children buried in your backyard because of smallpox, or some other illness.
Technology = humans losing contact with humanity.
A person from the other side of the United States is contacting you within less than a day. In 1900 this would have been a miracle for working class people.
The economy is a machine and keeps breaking down.
Welcome to capitalism.
Life would be better than the 1900's if we learned how to take care of what we have (the environment), and use science for postive reasons.
Life already is better than the 1900s.
We're spending millions for space exploration--where we will never go--while people on Earth suffer.
Your children and children's children will go out there. In 1900 such an idea would be a fantastic dream, nothing more. Today it is a reality.
"Also remember that refrigerators weren't available in those days, which meant that you ate food that was more prone to spoilage, unless you had an ice box, dried or canned your food."
most of your food was grown at the local farm anyway or grown by yourself in your GARDEN (which those who live in cities no longer have due to lack of space caused by over population)
and if you ran out of food it was just a simple trip to your local butcher or grocer to get some more where you could socialise with the people at the shop.
"As long as humanity exists, war will."
In the past, war meant something:adventure, conquest and it was good for the country. It was also fought with more strategy and diplomacy and leaders in the army were brave and respected. It was also more felt at home when you learned that a member of your family had been killed fighting for his country.
And in todays world: someone pushes a button that sets of a nuclear missile which kills billions of people.
"Your children and children's children will go out there. In 1900 such an idea would be a fantastic dream, nothing more. Today it is a reality."
YOU WISH xD
the world would have been ended by that time by global warming (or some other disaster )which we could have prevented with the money we spent on space exploration
most of your food was grown at the local farm anyway or grown by yourself in your GARDEN (which those who live in cities no longer have due to lack of space caused by over population)
Without a refrigerator microorganisms could produce exotoxins which lead to food poisoning. Some fruits and vegetables are extremely perishable.
and if you ran out of food it was just a simple trip to your local butcher or grocer to get some more where you could socialise with the people at the shop.
Unless you were black. Or Chinese. Or a woman. In which case you had social barriers and were either talked down to or prevented from using the facility.
In the past, war meant something:adventure, conquest and it was good for the country. It was also fought with more strategy and diplomacy and leaders in the army were brave and respected. It was also more felt at home when you learned that a member of your family had been killed fighting for his country.
The same is still true.
the world would have been ended by that time by global warming (or some other disaster )which we could have prevented with the money we spent on space exploration
The only way for us to survive is to colonise space.
"Without a refrigerator microorganisms could produce exotoxins which lead to food poisoning. Some fruits and vegetables are extremely perishable."
and injecting them with chemicals is supposed to make this better?
"Unless you were black. Or Chinese. Or a woman. In which case you had social barriers and were either talked down to or prevented from using the facility"
nowadays the butcher (at the big global supermarket) pretends to like you while injecting water into your chicken to rip you off.
"The same is still true."
there is a difference between running into an enemy trench and pushing a button which launches a nuke.
"The only way for us to survive is to colonise space."
if this was our only way to survive then we will all die
Although America was once upon a time a rich or wealthy country, we are now broke and in grave danger of a financial collapse!! The good ole days are over for America due to our $14 trillion dollar debt! We will continue to see more trouble in our near future! Civil unrest, homelessness, and unemployment has made itself at home here in America! Wake up America! watch or follow the news and open your eyes an watch whats happening all around you! Stop believing and falling for the deceptive picture of lies that the government paints for you! use your brain that the Lord gave you and do some heavy online research concerning your human rights,read the U.S. constitution,write your representatives and congress members!