From: Tchiowa on 14 Aug 2006 21:00
> On 14 Aug 2006 04:14:55 -0700, "Tchiowa" <tchiowa2(a)hotmail.com>
> >Balkanized is a term that came into common use during the 1990s when
> >Yugoslavia came apart and the Balkans erupted into war. Balkanized
> >means that the area has been chopped up into small independent
> >political entities based on mutual hatred.
> You must be young to think the word "Balkanized" came into common
> use in the 1990s.
Sorry, but while it may have been used in some circles, *common* usage
didn't happen until the Balkans came apart rather violently in the 90s.
> >Kind of like the rest of Europe.
> >Or did you think that all those nations formed by some kind of magic?
> THOSE nations were formed in the aftermath of WW1,
Amazing. No Germany or France or England or Italy or Spain or Portugal
or Ireland prior to WWI. All the history books must be wrong.
From: Miguel Cruz on 14 Aug 2006 21:03
"Tchiowa" <tchiowa2(a)hotmail.com> wrote:
> Jordi wrote:
>> In terms of distance, it is, in cultural terms a trip from Athens to
>> Berlin is a greater 'distance'.
> Nonsense. The difference in culture between New York City, San
> Francisco, Miami, New Orleans are every bit as great.
I'm having a hard time grasping this claim.
Take New York and New Orleans, to be charitable.
The vast majority of people speak the same language. They have 95% of
the same TV channels, substantially the same popular music and films,
the same brands in the shops and the same chains of shops. They have 200
years of shared national history and for most people the same elections
are the most important.
Contrast this with Athens and Berlin. A tiny minority of the people have
shared fluency in any language. They share a handful of TV channels,
mostly the channels that are available in New York and New Orleans as
well. Popular music and films are different, the cuisines have less
overlap, and individuals in one city have almost no interest in the same
political issues as those in the other. They don't even use the same
Photos from 40 countries on 5 continents: http://travel.u.nu
Latest photos: Malaysia; Thailand; Singapore; Spain; Morocco
Airports of the world: http://airport.u.nu
From: Tchiowa on 14 Aug 2006 21:09
> Tchiowa wrote:
> > Jordi wrote:
> > > Tchiowa wrote:
> > >
> > > In this context, it's a matter of grade and word choice.
> > No, in this context it's the core of what works and what doesn't work.
> In your black & white world, perhaps.
If you are unable to understand the difference between government
control and regulation then you have a real problem with economics.
> > > In terms of distance, it is, in cultural terms a trip from Athens to
> > > Berlin is a greater 'distance'.
> > Nonsense. The difference in culture between New York City, San
> > Francisco, Miami, New Orleans are every bit as great.
> No, they're not.
Spoken like a true Euro who have never been to the US.
Before you come up with the "smart" response, I've been to Europe
probably 100 times and visited a large number of European countries.
> > > The boundaries are there for a reason.
> > Hate, bigotry, a millienium of murder, how are those for starters?
> There's history, you see. Are you by any chance pretending the US is
> exempt from those?
No. Just pointing out the fact that the reason so many Euros have
passports is due to hatred and bigotry, not some cultural superiority
as has been implied.
> > > No, we're talking two completely different things. All this came after
> > > you said more or less 'what's the use of holidays if people don't have
> > > money to spend', Europeans do have enough money to keep a... say
> > > 'western' lifestyle without having to work 51 weeks a year, that's all.
> > But their "western" lifestyle is lower than American's.
> In what sense? 1.0 litre less of engine?, 4 less inches on a flat TV?
> Having some real vacation weighs substantially more on overal quality
> of life.
As do a lot of other things. Most Americans have "real" vacations and
most have more to spend on their vacations that Euros do.
> > > I don't think so if people have to wait until they're 50 to get 4 weeks
> > > vacation.
> > They don't. Some do, some don't.
> A vast majority don't
> > But are you saying that you can't enjoy time with your family and still work????
> You can, just less.
Quantity as opposed to quality?
> > > > Me and the official unemployment statistics.
> > >
> > > Oversimplificating again. Unemployment has very deep roots.
> > And the government mandated benefits that have no relation to effort
> > and productivity are part of those roots.
> So you believe. Many studies show an increased vacation time reduces
> stress and improves productivity.
> > > > OK. I'm waiting for the definition and the point.
> > >
> > > "there is no way to calculate how much is excessive as it depends on
> > > every individual and work position."
> > Then how can you say that the amount Americans work is "excessive"?
> It's less than other very productive economies (Australians have 5
> weeks, Sweden has 25 days, etc.)
Less or more is not the issue. You said *EXCESSIVE*! Then you admit you
can't calculate it. So maybe Australians vacation is *excessive*.
> > > > Most. Read the studies. Vacations are times of high family violence due
> > > > to stress.
> > >
> > > Do you have any cite or this is 'personal experience' again?
> > Lots of stats. I'll dig some out for you. Although I expect that you
> > won't believe them.
> No conservative think-tanks, please.
Ah, I see. No one who disagrees with your pre-formed opinions. As I
said, you obviously won't believe what you read.
> > > Once they're written down by law they're not benefits any more, they
> > > become rights, and are the same for everyone. There are other benefits
> > > beyond those that businesses own to motivate them.
> > ???? Of course they are benefits. Just because they are government
> > mandated doesn't change that.
> > And since those benefits have no direct relation to productivity they
> > are a burden on the employer.
> They're rights, as any employer not granting them would be breaking the
> law, and they're the same for everyone so they can hardly be a burden
> for an individual employer.
So what???????? The are still benefits. And as the employer has to pay
them then they are clearly a burden. The fact that the governments in
the EU burden all employers that way doesn't change those facts.
> If you are talking on an international level, you will see many of
> these allegedly burdened employers competing hand to hand with other
> 'unburdened' ones.
With a whole lot less employees which is demonstrated by the high
unemployment rates in Europe.
From: Tchiowa on 14 Aug 2006 21:12
> On 14 Aug 2006 03:43:58 -0700, "Tchiowa" <tchiowa2(a)hotmail.com>
> >Jordi wrote:
> >> Tchiowa wrote:
> >> > Yup. In part. But they still have their passports. But my statement
> >> > still stands. Europeans travel "abroad" more than Americans because
> >> > damn near everything in Europe is "abroad" for Europeans? Brussels to
> >> > Amsterdam is a foreign trip. New York to LA isn't. Which is the greater
> >> > travel?
> >> In terms of distance, it is, in cultural terms a trip from Athens to
> >> Berlin is a greater 'distance'.
> >Nonsense. The difference in culture between New York City, San
> >Francisco, Miami, New Orleans are every bit as great.
> Especially the languages.
Yes. Creole vs. Spanish.
> >> The boundaries are there for a reason.
> >Hate, bigotry, a millienium of murder, how are those for starters?
> I'd think you were talking about the USA if you hadn't said a
> "millenium" We've only ahd some 500 years for it.
The US has no international boundaries therefore the point is
irrelevant. And don't forget that the vast majority of that violence in
the US over 500 years was committed by Europeans.
> >> No, we're talking two completely different things. All this came after
> >> you said more or less 'what's the use of holidays if people don't have
> >> money to spend', Europeans do have enough money to keep a... say
> >> 'western' lifestyle without having to work 51 weeks a year, that's all.
> >But their "western" lifestyle is lower than American's.
> In northern Europe? Not that I can see.
The average American *who is living in poverty* has a greater living
space (in his house or apartment) than the average European middle
From: Tchiowa on 14 Aug 2006 21:13
> As for me, I have found New York and New Orleans to have very
> different cultures, perhaps because I grew up in a still
> different culture: the Midwest. And San Francisco??? I've lived
> there; it's different.
That's putting it mildly. ;-)