Rereading Karl Marx

[TheQuestion]

a lot of people argued that al gore lost the elections to bush back then because he "sunk to bush's level", by playing at his level.

i guess the super highway in africa was an example of that - Silence Sky made an insinuation that shanghai was performing better than singapore, his only supporting statement being that they have a super highway. so that was ludicrous to me, since it would equate to us building a longer super highway in africa, and thereafter declaring that africa was performing better than singapore or shanghai. and i said that, and here i am misquoted.

but of course, certain people would not mention the other half of the statement. :sweatsm: distorting arguments is not enough - distorting words is far easier!

i would certainly give more credibility if people talked about economics; but i think past dicussions have more than reinforced my firm belief that economics have no place here in Clubsnap - there is a general tendency to end up going through fundamental concepts before we can even have a vaguely useful discussion, and that is way too tiring for me, since such could be easily googled or picked up from popular bookstore. hence we have to use super highways. :angel:

eh what talking u? Gore didn't sink to Bush level at all. He lost coz of Florida plain and simple. Since you went to RJC and now LSE you so smart can come up with a good model for us simpletons to understand ma. your super african highway example so abstract some of us cannot grasp...so simplify somemore lor otherwise what's the point of your schooling? That will show us how smart you really are if you can do it show us the fruits of your ultra elite schooling please and it'll shut all your critics up.

 

[night86mare]

since you went to rjc and now lse you so smart can come up with a good model for us simpletons to understand ma.

...

...

...

i quote wikipedia:

Soon after the convention, with running mate Joe Lieberman, Gore hit the campaign trail. He and Bush were deadlocked in the polls.[114] Gore and Bush participated in three televised debates. While both sides claimed victory after each, Gore was critiqued as either too stiff, too reticent, or too aggressive in contrast to Bush.

 

[TheQuestion]

also hor silence sky raised a very good point mr econ expert: please explain why the cost for cancer treatment is more expensive here than in our neighbor up north when all things are considered equal in terms of medicine and procedure. i econ noob so i very interested in hearing a expert explainable. actually while you're at it can you also explain why singapore hasn't been too adversely affected by the ongoing credit crunch and the country runs that's happening to iceland and russia?

 

[TheQuestion]

...

...

...

i quote wikipedia:

what's that got to do with stooping to Bush's level? Gore dun have Al Rove le. Have you even seen any of the political ads run from that election? If Gore stopped to bush's level then he would have talk like his england cmi like bush and act like the village idiot. but Gore didn't so i dunnoe how is that stooping to W's level le...please explain.

 

[night86mare]

what's that got to do with stooping to Bush's level? Gore dun have Al Rove le. Have you even seen any of the political ads run from that election? If Gore stopped to bush's level then he would have talk like his england cmi like bush and act like the village idiot. but Gore didn't so i dunnoe how is that stooping to W's level le...please explain.

er..

he carried out ad hominem attacks, which was all the substance that bush had. if he had just stuck by his guns, and carried on with logic.. i'm more than certain there would be less criticism of the previous mentioned.

unless you do claim that televised debates have zero part to play in any us election...?

 

[TheQuestion]

Also hor its been well proven unless there's a big cockup by either candidate at the debates, the debates normally dun have an adverse effect on how voters see each presidential debate. Famous example of cockup includes W's father: The first Bush.

 

[TheQuestion]

er..

he carried out ad hominem attacks, which was all the substance that bush had. if he had just stuck by his guns, and carried on with logic.. i'm more than certain there would be less criticism of the previous mentioned.

unless you do claim that televised debates have zero part to play in any us election...?

i answered ur last q so i answe the other bits...LOGIC?! hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhaaha
funny man. If you follow any of their elections you will notice a trend of logic being thrown out the window for their elections. otherwise you think W would have won the last election when they all knew he wasn't good for the country at all...even this one there's the thing about people still labelling obama as a terrorist or arab when that's been logically disproven over and over. Please la dun play the logic card. American Elections are a marketing competition. Plain and simple. also note for you hor: gore won the popular vote. He lost because he didn't have the # of electoral votes. But #s wise he beat bush. So to say gore wasn't popular coz of his unpopular personality is a little absurd. btw thanks for the good laugh about the LOGIC bit

 

[night86mare]

also hor silence sky raised a very good point mr econ expert: please explain why the cost for cancer treatment is more expensive here than in our neighbor up north when all things are considered equal in terms of medicine and procedure. i econ noob so i very interested in hearing a expert explainable. actually while you're at it can you also explain why singapore hasn't been too adversely affected by the ongoing credit crunch and the country runs that's happening to iceland and russia?

would you claim the words in bold to be absolutely true?

the explanation is not hard - cost of labour. the average malaysian houseman, if i recall correctly, earns an average of RM 3,000 a month. the average singaporean houseman, last i remembered, earns about SGD40,000 a year after taxes. for cancer specialists, there have never been very official figures, but i guess you can base it on the general trend of labour costs? i doubt a cancer specialist would earn equal pay if he worked in malaysia versus singapore. which is also why there have been many complaints from malaysia about houseman pay - and why it's going to double by 2010.

and there are many other things. one could argue that arbitrage (the concept that you cannot simply magick goods/services to be applied elsewhere liberally, and therefore say that their price is equal) applies to a smaller extent here due to the causeway.. but it still applies.

and i think silence sky has more than clarified the point that he didn't mean that the medical costs had to be equal. i am curious what he meant then, since you also misconstrued his statement as such.

 

[night86mare]

i answered ur last q so i answe the other bits...LOGIC?! hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhaaha
funny man. If you follow any of their elections you will notice a trend of logic being thrown out the window for their elections. otherwise you think W would have won the last election when they all knew he wasn't good for the country at all...even this one there's the thing about people still labelling obama as a terrorist or arab when that's been logically disproven over and over. Please la dun play the logic card. American Elections are a marketing competition. Plain and simple.

it's all about image. on national tv, if you "act the village idiot" in response to "the village idiot".. then what do people think of you?

and image is everything in marketing.

 

[TheQuestion]

would you claim the words in bold to be absolutely true?

the explanation is not hard - cost of labour. the average malaysian houseman, if i recall correctly, earns an average of RM 3,000 a month. the average singaporean houseman, last i remembered, earns about SGD40,000 a year after taxes.

and there are many other things. one could argue that arbitrage (the concept that you cannot simply magick goods/services to be applied elsewhere liberally, and therefore say that their price is equal) applies to a smaller extent here due to the causeway.. but it still applies.

and i think silence sky has more than clarified the point that he didn't mean that the medical costs had to be equal. i am curious what he meant then, since you also misconstrued his statement as such.

i dunnoe i too lazy to quote him so just ask u for explanation based on what i saw lor.

 

[TheQuestion]

it's all about image. on national tv, if you "act the village idiot" in response to "the village idiot".. then what do people think of you?

and image is everything in marketing.

ok i blur liao...are u saying gore should've or shouldn't have acted stupid like W

 

[night86mare]

i dunnoe i too lazy to quote him so just ask u for explanation based on what i saw lor.

is the answer satisfactory? :dunno:

i am still a little puzzled why my schooling has been brought up. i have never judged anyone based on background, so i am curious how this is applied to me.

 

[night86mare]

ok i blur liao...are u saying gore should've or shouldn't have acted stupid like W

he shouldn't have sunk to his level. so i guess the option to pick is the latter one? :think:

 

[TheQuestion]

is the answer satisfactory? :dunno:

nope. u didn't answer. simplify in english and no jargon please.

 

[TheQuestion]

he shouldn't have sunk to his level. so i guess the option to pick is the latter one? :think:

ok then why he lose since he had the cleaner image of not being the village idiot? He didn't sink to W's level so i dunnoe why u keep saying shouldn't have making it sound like he did. unless my england machiam poor. Also note hor if election was solely an image thing then Palin would be president now instead of being constantly derided for contradicting herself.

 

[night86mare]

nope. u didn't answer. simplify in english and no jargon please.

...

...

...

what sort of lack of jargon do you want? the only thing i might have used was arbitrage, which appears in the newspapers as well. i even explained it.

if cancer specialist a in malaysia has half the pay of cancer specialist b in singapore - how can cancer treatment be equal?

you might as well question why lenses in hong kong cost less than the ones in singapore, even though they are the same thing.

 

[night86mare]

ok then why he lose since he had the cleaner image of not being the village idiot? He didn't sink to W's level so i dunnoe why u keep saying shouldn't have making it sound like he did. unless my england machiam poor. Also note hor if election was solely an image thing then Palin would be president now instead of being constantly derided for contradicting herself.

he. sunk. to. the. level. during.

the.

debates. watch. them. again. even though you probably have.

here's a link you might be interested in.

The televised presidential debates have played a key role in many of the US election campaigns since the 1960 Kennedy-Nixon contest. Here are some of the dramatic moments which changed the course of election history.

Al Gore took a dismissive stance during the first of his three presidential debates with George W Bush in 2000.

Mr Gore was seen shaking his head and rolling his eyes during their clash on 3 October - a move that did not go down well with some of those watching.

 

[TheQuestion]

he. sunk. to. the. level. during.

the.

debates. watch. them. again. even though you probably have.

no need la coz the fact that Gore won the popular vote shows that people dun care about his image...much! btw every debate both sides will always claim victory and knock the other...its called SPIN.

 

[night86mare]

no need la coz the fact that Gore won the popular vote shows that people dun care about his image...much! btw every debate both sides will always claim victory and knock the other...its called SPIN.

apologies, i think you missed the edit.

please look at the last post again. i don't suppose you would deem any bbc stance to be "ludicrous" or.. well, anything like that.

image is one thing, showing that you are juvenile, and even more juvenile than your opponent when you know that the whole of america (or most of it) is watching.. that's another

 

[TheQuestion]

apologies, i think you missed the edit.

please look at the last post again. i don't suppose you would deem any bbc stance to be "ludicrous" or.. well, anything like that.

image is one thing, showing that you are juvenile, and even more juvenile than your opponent when you know that the whole of america (or most of it) is watching.. that's another

if that's the case then don't you think mccain's poll #s would be non existent now since he's shown that's he's been more erratic and angry and inciting then obama? bbc stance count for what? they're not the american media. It'll be like Fox news bill O Reilly commenting about Gordon Brown's performance. you must remember le more americans in america watch their news networks then BBC.