Celestiall Nightfire

Deej Kasshiki wrote: Just take a look at the SL Viewer subforum to get a taste of what I'm talking about. Anyone who goes there and dares speak ill of v2 will be told to leave SL, called names, told to program their own viewer and generally shouted down. It's pretty insane. People take criticism of the Lab as personal somehow and respond by launching nasty attacks as if someone had insulted a family member. I didn't know there was a SL Viewer subform. But, I'd abuse report the hell out of them, if they are calling you names, and launching personal attacks. It they violate TOS...then the moderators should do their job when an AR is received. A few times of having a moderator drop into the threads to advise of civil discourse ought to clean it up.

Carbon Philter wrote: My pc isn't powerful enough to test with alts and I haven't enough friends to get them to help test........... Hey, Carbon. If you need someone to help test a vehicle hit me up inworld. I've done plenty of vehicle testing in SL and would be happy to be a passenger and/or give feedback. That goes for any type of vehicle: cars, planes, boats, or hoverbikes.

Ishtara Rothschild wrote: Celestiall Nightfire wrote: Ishy, you probably only get your views of what goes on in America from reading online stuff right? Well here's a site you can read from for a while: http://hillbuzz.org/ I followed the link, scrolled down a little, read something about "gaystapo" bullies and labor unions being Obama's thug army, and closed the site again. Sorry, but... I really do get my views from websites and a few U.S. TV shows, but I'm a bit selective there PS: I also googled the name of the blog author and was surprised to find out that he's not a gay-hating conservative, but instead a self-loathing gay Christian conservative with a penchant for Hillary Clinton (who, according to him, is disadvantaged by not being black). He claims that the religious right doesn't hate gays as much as the Democrats do :matte-motes-bored:, completely ignoring the fact that his fellow conservatives are publishing things about him like "Let’s not be fooled by so-called 'conservative' gay activists like DuJan…they are in line with the marxists". I can't even begin to understand all these mental balancing acts. Gosh, Ishy..I would have expected a little more open-minded exploring of the facts from you! You didn't even read the details of how Dujan...a liberal left gay guy living in Chicago...became a political conservative! Here's the shortened version: During the 2008 Democratic 2008 presidential run-off, Dujan decided to back Hillary Clinton, instead of Obama. But, Dujan was living in Chicago, Obama's newly adopted territory. Dujan received hate mail, death threats, physical assaults, and constant harassment from the Obama supporters. Including most of the liberal-gay community. He was so upset by this, that when Obama won the nomination, Dujan decided to back McCain/Palin. Then he really caught a back-lash worse than before! Horrible things said to him, people trying to beat him up, physically damaging his property, constant harassment. All from the "tolerant liberal left". So you form your opinions based upon what dissenters write about someone, rather than what the person themselves writes?! Gee, if I followed that method, and only Googled your avatar name and read unfavorable comments "about" you, instead of actually reading your brilliant posts on your blog....hmmm, I guess I might not like you so much. But, I actually take the time to read your blog-stuff, and get to understand your thinking. Thus, I like you. : ) Sidenote: That's not to say that you'll like Dujan after reading his writings, but at least get to know the guy, before dismissing him. Sheesh

Suella Ember wrote: Eloise Baily wrote: She scares me a lot if she's genuinely a presidential candidate. I mean, seriously? She scares me. People who support her scare me more. (This one will definitely get RIC'd! :smileywink: ) Boo! here's some scaaaary guys for you then: http://hillbuzz.org/ BTW: I'm not a Palin supporter. But, all the bashing toward Palin, who is a self-made woman, (as in she did not ride her husbands' coat-tails into power like Hillary) really pisses me off.

Ishtara Rothschild wrote: Don't be petty. We've had our fair share of political discussions in GD in the past, some of which you have participated in if I remember correctly. I don't recall any complaints about political debates prior to Randall blowing a fuse and thoroughly derailing this thread with inane tea party BS. Don't you be petty Ishy. The TOS of this forum says something about staying on topic and about staying with SL topics. neither of which this thread adheres to. BTW, Randall didn't do the derail. Venus did. Nor, is what Randall posted, anything do with tea party BS. Ishy, you proabably only get your views of what goes on in America from reading online stuff right? Well here's a site you can read from for a while: http://hillbuzz.org/

Adding another comment to this thread. Eloise, the flash dancing was beautiful! If you were part of that ...wow...I love it. Too bad this thread turned into a political bash-fest, instead of an actual fest. I don't blame you Eloise, but the turn this thread has taken, starting with the first comment, is the kind of turn that goes nowhere good.

Randall Ahren wrote: You're posting in the wrong forum. This is not a political discussion site. There are thousands of sites dedicated to political discussion where you can type until your fingers bleed. I'm interested in seeing subject matter related to SL in this forum, not your political views. This falls into the realm of deep-seated convictions, like religion. You're not going to persuade anybody of anything. They already agree with you or they don't. So save it or post it somewhere else. Agree, with Randall, that is. I too have reported this thread. ----------------------------------------------------------------- Hey, Keeper, my sleep has really been messed up! Oh, I also have a new dress (think Grace Kelly ; ), that is begging to be seen on a SL dance floor. I almost sent you an IM yesterday as you were online, and I just got the dress! *laughing* Send me an IM if you're inworld when I am, and we can check out some dance places.

Jo Yardley wrote: ChloeRenee wrote: lmfaooo!!! I didnt have an AO for like a month either...i didnt even think i was walking funny. I didn't have an AO for months, I don't really care about appearance and such so I was fine with the way my avatar walked around. But it drove my friends nuts so one day they bought me an AO :matte-motes-big-grin: Jo, like you...I didn't care about my avatars appearance very much. I was in SL for 3.5+ years before I started using an AO! Only after I starting seeing someone, and he kindly offered me a free walk AO, and suggested I might want to try...did I actually start using one. *laughing*

Ahh, the days of camping. As a Noobie, I did camping to get $L to buy some green eyes (my very first SL purchase) and I did actually have to stay at the computer, as the camping script required that I click on a drop-down menu periodically to prove I was not a bot. But, I did manage to get enough money to buy my green eyes. I was lucky when I came to SL, two day after arriving my long-time building partner TPd me into his location and gave me safe harbor. (the person who first told me about SL) He sent a lot of time teaching me how things worked in SL, giving me things to help my new avatar, tutoring me on building, etc. He bought me my first prim hair, and showed me how to manage my inventory, and alter my avatar, etc. I owe him a lot, as he helped me accelerate the inworld learning curve a lot. As a Noobie I was obsessed with learning how things worked in SL! I took things apart, looked at stuff, modded things, went through all the tutorials at the Particle Laboratory, and the Ivory Tower of Prims, and read blogs, etc. I was constantly trying to add to my inworld skill set.

Venus Petrov wrote: Carole Franizzi wrote: Gawd, Mailily, I’m obviously doing a rotten job of explaining myself. No, that is not it. What Venus said.

Dresden Ceriano wrote: Your right though, I should not "chastise" you for your reply to Ish or your interpretation of what she said... I didn't think I was. I didn't think so either...you silly! I was merely mirroring back to you. *laughing* (showing you how what you wrote *could* be construed as chastising since you choose words like "injustice", etc. Dresden Ceriano wrote: I thought I was merely telling you what my own interpretation was, perhaps I didn't express that well enough or perhaps you just took it the wrong way. Yup. I know it was your interpretation, and I was pointing out that it was a wrong one from my point of view. (using the example of how your words could be "interpreted" the same way. "took it the wrong way"? Hmm, you mean like how you took my mirroring example (complete with ; ) the winking thing wrong? Dresden Ceriano wrote: We may never know. ...Dres Acck! Don't give up now! We must get to the bottom of this....this....Oh wait. I have it all figured out. Whew. Thank good ness for my perceptiveness...which never steers me wrong. *smiles* *wonders off to read more forum comments...beaming with sheer perceptive understanding and enlightenment*

Storm Clarence wrote: Willow Danube wrote: I wish Unklebob, Ravin, Brenda, Suspiria, Nathaniel, Anthony and Jig (especially Jig) would come back too. The forums isn't a complete circle without these people. To the rest.. welcome back and STAY. Me too. I would also like to see Prok write some more to this forum. But I am glad to read who I am reading. I'll second this one! Prokofy is a brilliant mind, and can be very witty and informative. But...but....I don't see anyone calling for Wasted? Hello? Wasted...are you out there? *laughing* -------------------------------------------------------------- Edited to add my own personal wish list, which harkens back to the old SLX / X-Street forums 1) Kenn N. (my fellow Libertarian who I know is very busy these days with work, but I so miss his posts...I have to log into Facebook or Google+ to read him : ( 2) Naergilien W. (Uber talented creatrix who gave great tips and tutorials to people on the creative forums.)

Dresden Ceriano wrote: Celestiall Nightfire wrote: So, in *your* SL, then sure, feel free to see someone that uses a wheelchair as a mental health case, and bounce them out of your sim or club. I don't understand... where did Ishy ever say anything like that? It is a compilation of several statements that Ishy made. But, if it makes you feel better I'll admend it to this: "So, in *your* SL, then sure, feel free to see someone that portrays themselves as a burn victim as a mental health case, and bounce them out of your sim or club.  Ishtara Rothschild wrote: Imagine an ideal world where all diseases have been reliminated, lost limbs can easily be replaced, and genes can be spliced and altered without limitations. How would you feel if somebody in this perfect world were to inflict third-degree burns on himself as a fashion statement? Without considering what this might say about this person's mental health, would it be discriminatory if a bouncer at an exclusive club refused to let this person in? So, I complied that, and reposted it with my understanding of how she might act towards someone making their avatar unsightly (I'll use burn victim) to her sim. Based upon what she has written so far in this thread, it seems to be a good likelihood that she would see an avatar in who is a burn victim as a greifer mental case and bounce them from her lovely beaches. Dresden Ceriano wrote: I love your perception of SL, and agree with most of it, but in reality, most people have emotions that are not necessarily PC and those thoughts are usually hidden in fear that the rest of society will chastise them for being inconsiderate. Denying that does a greater injustice than admitting it, as Ish has done in this thread. Hmm, who's denying that society is "not PC", in their thinking? Of course society (in general) is judgmental and harsh, and not kind and PC. Since we all do have our own perceptions, I'll use mine here, and say that I have not chastised Ishy. Nor, do I think that Ishy sees my comments that way. I've exchanged many a thought with Ishy over the years, and have much respect and fondness for her. I certainly hope my comments are not construed as chastising. I thought this was a discussion where we can state what we think? Now, if you're done chastising me for some perceived "injustice", I'll finish my comment. (See how that perception thing works? ; ) Dresden Ceriano wrote:. ...Dres ETA: Not that I meant she was being inconsiderate, just honest. Of course she's being honest, as am I. Ishy does not want people to come into her thread and be all acquiescing. How is that going to facilitate a discussion?

Ishtara Rothschild wrote: Celestiall Nightfire wrote in part: The rest of your OP I cannot relate to. I have no problem with avatars in wheelchairs, amputees, or any other physical RL impairment being used. Nor, do I any problems relating to people in RL with various physical handicaps. That is RL though. These matters can't be helped in RL, not at this point in time anyway. Imagine an ideal world where all diseases have been reliminated, lost limbs can easily be replaced, and genes can be spliced and altered without limitations. That is a future or imaginary world that we don't have yet Ishy. One that medical science is working toward, but is not here yet. What you just described is a wish...for the future. Not reality. Nor, is SL that future world, not for me. Ishtara Rothschild wrote: How would you feel if somebody in this perfect world were to inflict third-degree burns on himself as a fashion statement? Do you see SL as some "perfect world"? Well, surprise, surprise, many others see SL as an extension of RL. Nor, would I ever refer to a third-degree-burn, even in jest, as a fashion statement. Why would you see a person who wishes to represent their SL physical self as an avatar in SL as making a "fashion" statement? Just because you want to transmogrify your SL-self into something that does not reflect your RL-self, does not mean that there is anything wrong with those who wish to embody their RL self in the virtual world of SL. Ishtara Rothschild wrote: Without considering what this might say about this person's mental health, would it be discriminatory if a bouncer at an exclusive club refused to let this person in? Your concluding question is faulty, because your previous analogy was faulty. You assumed that SL is equal to the "perfect world", one without any body-physical flaws. But, since that is based wholly upon *your* perceptions, I do not have to buy into it. Nor, do I. In *my* SL, I see a world where people are free to become what they wish. Even, if what they wish, is to be the same as they are in RL. I do not require that others have my perception of SL. So, in *your* SL, then sure, feel free to see someone that uses a wheelchair as a mental health case, and bounce them out of your sim or club. SL is unique in that anyone can live the SL they want. (within the range of TOS) So, you are free to use an idealized beauty/ugliness standard based upon a perfect future world, but understand that others may very well use a different standard. Someone who does not cotton to your standards, is not automatically a greifer, not in my SL. I'm not immune to the lure of physical beauty Ishy, and your lovely pink-skinned avatar is one of my favorites to look at here on the forums. But, I'm also drawn to uniqueness, and there are many who display avatars which may not be *beautiful* in the traditional sense, but are so interesting, that I want to engage them and get to know them.

Very interesting topic Ishy. I agree that an avatar purposely designed to look like fecal matter is one that is trying to "grief". I too would have seen that as something undesirable to a beach location where people go to relax and or engage in flirting. (not sure what happens on your beaches...so just guessing here) Probably silly kids, and they wanted to get a reaction. As you're the sim owner and are trying to cultivate a certain atmosphere on your sim, then banning them is fine. The rest of your OP I cannot relate to. I have no problem with avatars in wheelchairs, amputees, or any other physical RL impairment being used. Nor, do I any problems relating to people in RL with various physical handicaps. My first two years in college, I roomed with and was an assistant to students who were quadriplegics. I bathed them, dressed them, toileted them, and got them ready for their day on campus. I lived with them, and assisted in all physical regards. Later, and for many years, I worked in nursing homes and hospitals. I've cared for all manner of bodies both alive and dead, and all ages. From the very elderly to children and babies. I worked at a children's hospital on the Burn Unit. Do, you know what it's like to be with badly burned children? You have to treat them the same as any other child, and you cannot let their physical appearance affect you. So an avatar in a wheelchair? No problem. An avatar with a colostomy bag? No problem. I've changed quite a few colostomy bags in my day, and the people who have them are already sensitive enough about their situation, so why would I want them to feel bad about a medical condition? I would have no problem with seeing any RL physical condition being displayed as a SL avatar. Ishy, you have a very lovely avatar. Yet, there are people who might find *your* avatar to be offensive. Think about it. Ugliness, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder.

Pamela Galli wrote: Oh plenty of exceptions! Not a very scientific poll either :-) But I bet you are not going to find many ESTJs in SL. Hi Pamela! I happen to be an ESTJ. But, I also have noticed a predominance of people in SL that say or write on their profiles that they are Introverts in RL, and that SL allows them the opportunity to display a more out-going personality. Now, as to the S part that is for Sensing. It means that Sensing types experience the world more by sensory data like touch, hearing, and taste. Think of the five senses. Although it's true that all people experience the world through sensory data those that are Sensing types predominately use that for finding out about the world. As opposed to the N=Intuitive types that use their internal feelings to find out things. These are generalizations, as all people use both. It's just the some people favor one method over the other. For me, the E/S is more than 50%, but I also have fairly high IN factors. My SL exploring partner is also an Extroverted type, so there are two more Extroverts you can add to your poll. : ) Sidenote: The T=Thinking, which means that those with that trait rely more on "Thinking" as opposed to "Feeling" for decisions. The J=Judging, which means that I'm a judgmental meanie-cat unlike all those nice P=Perception folks. Hmm, this might also explain why I have such a hard time relating to the feeling-sensitive "Hugs" people in SL and this forum. (Laughing) Edited to answer your question: Yes, I do recommend SL to friends, not all of my friends, but some. I have also recommended SL to several relatives, although I'm not aware of any that have created a SL account.

Lillie Woodells wrote: Morning Celestiall! Been thinking about you lady, I hope all is going well with you today! Hugs!!! Lillie! Hi. I was actually thinking about you yesterday. Have an idea, (I know...who'd have thunk it?) and wanted to run it by someone, to see if they could envision, what I cooked up in my head. Another Hoosier is what I need. Off to work right now, but will send you an IM inworld later tonight. Have a great day! : )

Venus Petrov wrote: Celestiall Nightfire wrote: Gosh, I love your posts. Your prolific prose just dances through my mind...seriously. Alliterations aplenty. *sigh* : ) (Pssst, I thought the LWL put a contract out on you. Glad to see you're alive) No one puts Pep in a corner. You just made me laugh out loud for real! (had to read your line with the proper emphasis...and knowing what that line alludes too...hehe)

Pep wrote: OK it's my fault. I christened them and effectively operationalised them as without me they would have been sitting on their big fat gluteus maximuses taking photos of their cankles and making lists of their duplicate purchases residing in their extensive lagladen inventories. I am Frankenstein (he was the creator; the monster was unnamed) except i have, as in the best of black magic rituals, given a name to the multi-headed hydra and thereby given it substance where there was none, invoking a coven of zombies that dance around their handbags barefooted and who stick bobby-pins into victims they lure into the pentacle of the People Forum. These latter nemeses are those imbued with more powers of empathy than the koffeeklatsch of rather dull-witted and unperspicacious members who would wish these mean spirits to use their gifts in the direction of the sympathetic magic that the prandial postmenopausal participants purport to perform. Pep (recommends that the LWL enter merger negotiations with the SLLU, thus potentially obtaining economies of scale in their mutually compatible programs of universal inclusiveness.) Gosh, I love your posts. Your prolific prose just dances through my mind...seriously. Alliterations aplenty. *sigh* : ) (Pssst, I thought the LWL put a contract out on you. Glad to see you're alive)

Alazarin Mondrian wrote: Whether or not you buy the 'defending the free world' hokum what it's really about is imperial overreach. Why do you have your military bases all over Europe? [Cold war legacy perhaps?] Why do you insist on propping up unsavoury dictators-for-life in the various 'stans? [i can answer that one: encirclement of China and Russia]. Why does your CIA support the heroin trade in the golden triangle? [again: to keep a standing mercenary army on the Chinese border]. Uh, yes...read your history. The US has military bases in Europe because of the "Cold War". Are you asking *me* a Libertarian about US overseas interests?! Oh, good golly, miss molly. Here's a link to the Libertarian platform: http://www.lp.org/platform I'll quote you a little section: "We would end the current U.S. Government policy of foreign intervention, including military and economic aid. We recognize the right of all people to resist tyranny and defend themselves and their rights." Alazarin Mondrian wrote: You americans are the lunatic militarists of this era. Well, aren't you a nice fellow...name calling all. Lunatic? hehe See, it's hard to take someone serious who does not have the reading comprehension that is good enough to follow-a-long with the comments being posts and just goes off on a ranting tangent. Perhaps you should get a blog, I hear those are good for posting rants, and you don't have to actually pay attention to what the other people have written.

Ishtara Rothschild wrote: The USA has about 1,4 million soldiers under arms. 250,000 of those are paid for by Germany, Japan, Korea, and the Philipines. Which means that almost 18% of the U.S. military is not financed by the American tax payer. I have to admit that I thought the percentage was even higher, but it's still a considerable contribution. Ishy, where are you getting your statistics? Where are you getting the 18% of the US military budget financed *not* by US taxpayers? Please cite your sources. Ishtara Rothschild wrote: I mean, it's not as if all these countries really needed the American military presence. Not that I'm complaining, but why are there still troops stationed in Germany? The threat of the USSR is no more. The only reason that the troops are still here is that if they pulled out, the USA would have to pay for them themselves. I, for one, (and I can't think of too many US citizens who would not want this) would love to see the US military pull out of Europe, as it is a huge money drain on our taxpayers. So, you have to ask your fellow EU members why they want the US military presence. It probably has something to do with the history of the region, which Germany played not small part in. The USSR as only part of the picture. I say bring the US military home, but have you thought about how that would affect your German economy? You can't tell me that all those US military personnel and their families don't send money in Germany and help the local economy their. I know they do. Do you know how many Germans are employed by the US military? At one time over 70,000 German were employed by the US military. (down to 17,000) That does not include the money spent on land, housing, food, services, tourism, and more. All US has put billions of dollars into the German economy. This has provided a constant economic money flow into Germany, and it's still going on. How many people do you know that get their income from either from direct employment or indirectly from US military? If the US pulls out, there go the billions of dollars we currently funnel into Germany. I'd be ok with that, but it may not be the scenario you are envisioning. http://www.bicc.de/uploads/pdf/publications/reports/report04/report4.pdf Ishtara Rothschild wrote: How exactly are we being subsidized? We have all the military we need. At this point, the USA are not providing a service to us by having these troops stationed in Germany, we provide a service to the USA by paying for them. I'm pretty sure that the NATO would remain capable of acting if the USA were to cut their military spending down to a more reasonable level. Ishy, refer to my paragraphs above. Germany is subsidized by billions of US dollars coming into your economy. Through employing German citizens, through buying food, housing, land, and services. All the US troops and their families spend money, as does the US military...they spend money in your country. The small amount of money that Germany contributes does not begin to cover the money put out by the US in having a military presence in Germany. Ishtara Rothschild wrote: Besides, many NATO operations seem to serve mainly U.S. interests. The interests of the military sector and big oil, that is, not the interests of the American tax payer. Think of the operations in Libya for example, or the Iraq war. I don't really see the NATO as a peace keeping organization when we invade Middle Eastern countries but sit back and watch the genocide in Rwanda. Of course NATO serves US interests. We would not be a part of it if it did not. The cost in lives and money after two world wars was determined to be greater, and the threat of the former USSR, than they cost of being part of NATO. So, yes, the US has benefited for a long time from this arrangement as there was a controlled peace. But, Germany and the other NATO nations also benefited from this arrangement. Both monetarily and strategically. NATO was not organized to keep peace in the Middle East or Africa, so I'm not sure why you are mentioning those places. http://www.fco.gov.uk/en/global-issues/nato/ Ishtara Rothschild wrote: I can think of many adjectives to describe the German people, but frugal is not one of them I mean, it's not as if we live like the Amish. Germany is the third biggest market for consumer electronics, software, video games, music, and movies. German middle class families drive two to three cars, just like families in the USA. Well, then you should be happy that the US has pumped billions of dollars into the German economy over the years. : ) Have you thought about where the Germany economy would today, if after WWII, the US had pulled out all together? Do you know how much money total that the US has put into the Germany post-WWII? If you don't recall the details, then read up on the Marshall Plan and the European Recovery Program, (ERP) . Billions of dollars put into the UK and EU nations. Yes, this has been decades back, but what do you think the current condition of your economy would be if this had not been done? Ishtara Rothschild wrote: Wait... we're comparing two economic and political systems here: Germany's social market economy, a fairly regulated capitalist economy that is doing quite well despite the global recession, and the much less regulated U.S. economy, which has fallen into a deep recession due to a severe lack of regulation in the financial sector. Also due to the fact that wages have stagnated and declined since the 1990's, while the costs of living have increased by more than 65%, which has greatly reduced the purchasing power of the average citizen and driven many people below the poverty level. And you are suggesting that if we were to emulate the USA, we would be even better off? Sorry, but I somehow can't believe that. Yes, I'm saying that the German economy and the German citizens would be better off if they were not living in such a socialistic system. Do you even know what the "poverty level" in the US represents? "A family is counted as poor if its pretax money income is below its poverty threshold. Money income does not include noncash benefits such as public housing, Medicaid, employer-provided health insurance and food stamps." Look at this link:  http://www.npc.umich.edu/poverty/ Ishtara Rothschild wrote: We've learned a lot from the USA in the past. I think it is now time that the USA learns from social market economies such as France and Germany. Every system has its flaws and we can all learn from each other. It is rather arrogant to cling to the belief that the American political system is the best in the world when it clearly has some serious problems that become ever more apparent. I agree, that there are always opportunities to learn how to improve conditions. But, I disagree that the socialist leanings of the EU nations have the lessons that will help. It is directly due to intervention and economic aid over many decades from the US, that so many EU nations, and particularly Germany, are in decent position. The sheer volume of wealth created by capitalist economics is unparalleled in the world. Thus, the companies that create wealth provide jobs, and the standard of living and disposal income of those in the US remains high, even during a world-wide economic recession. (BTW: I currently, get my RL paycheck from one of the largest (if not the largest) and wealthiest US computer and electronics companies in the world) Ishtara Rothschild wrote: Patriotism is all good and well, but I think it often gets in the way of badly needed reforms. None of the rigid political ideologies that divide the USA and keep everyone at each other's throats is a be-all end-all solution that solves all economic and social problems. This almost religious adherence to political ideals only enforces a centrist course, no matter who is in charge, and prevents any real change for the better. Hmm, I was thinking the same thing about Germany and it's citizens after seeing how you have tried so hard to compare Germany and the US. A little national pride getting in the way of your good sense. : ) : ) Here's an interesting comparison article written by someone who grew up in Germany, lived there 26 years, and then moved to the US: http://math-www.uni-paderborn.de/~axel/us-d.html That comparison may help explain our diverging opinions here. (Edited to add italics to separate Ishy's words from mine, as this forum software does not want to cooperate)

Ishtara Rothschild wrote: The German system seems to work quite well. Despite all our socialism, but we have a relatively high standard of living, low poverty levels, and a healthy economy compared to the current economic situation in the USA. We can even afford to throw vast amounts of money at our less fortunate EU neighbors and pay for the upkeep and equipment of 54k U.S. soldiers (the fact that several other countries do the same enables the USA to remain a military super power). Ishatara, the small amount of money that Germany provides toward upkeep of a US military presence, does not even begin to touch the actual cost needed. Nor, is the amount that Germany provides very high in relation to the GNP of Germany. Here is a visual representation of how much Germany spends on military, and it amounts to about 3% of their GNP, as compared to what the US spends which is 19.3% : http://www.visualeconomics.com/how-countries-spend-their-money/ So, in actuality, the prosperity that Germany enjoys, is greatly subsidized by other NATO nations, and a huge amount of money, manpower and resources by the US. Now, I'm going to use the Wiki as source, because it has legitimate sources cited for the statistics "The combined military spending of all NATO members constitutes over 70% of the world's defence spending.[9] The United States alone accounts for 43% of the total military spending of the world[10] and the United Kingdom, France, Germany, and Italy account for a further 15%" So, the US contributes 43% of the total, and all the other countries combined divide up the remaining amount, with Germany, United Kingdom, France & Italy together adding 15%. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NATO The Wiki source, if anyone wants to know, is this: http://milexdata.sipri.org/ The fact the Germany has had a strong economy I think has more to do with the German people's propensity for frugality and good money management on an individual personal level, then socialist economics. Personally, I think that there would be more wealth and prosperity in your country, if Germany was not so socialist oriented.

Chris, thank you for posting these videos here! : ) Recently, I took over as director of the Mises Institute SL, which is the SL branch of the Ludwig von Mises Institute. I'll be relocating the inworld location, and remaking many of the materials located there. I've been given free rein by Jeffrey Tucker the editorial vice president of the Ludwig von Mises Institute.  I'd welcome input and ideas from like-minded people. If you're interested, I'll send you a LM for the current inworld location so you may see what's there. Here is a link to the Ludwig von Mises Institute's website: http://mises.org/ In keeping with your very excellent post here, I'll add a link to a recent Mises Institute editorial about the Hayek VS Keynes debate: http://mises.org/daily/5567/Hayeks-Ghost-Haunts-the-World

Maryanne Solo wrote: awww. See Sig. Unfortunatley your obsession began long before we realised it. Those who assist you have a proven webwide history of similar behaviour. No one or mods cares for the disruption of civil threads and look! you're doing it yet again. There is so much to do inworld. You must try your hand at creativity! In the last few days I have uploaded tons of textures and made quite a few new outfits had time to spend with friends and try to help on the forums too Helping is good fun! I don't mean idle comment, banter or gamed kudos, actual constructive help. Is your friend in LWL aware of your more destructive comments? I doubt it. Funny how even those outside of LWL seem to doubt your integrity just a teeny bit. Chickens coming home to roost perhaps? "Terpsichorean oenophile" ooo now that rings a bell! I wonder how Pep is these days? Some do miss him He would of course claim the LWL as his own and probably be a little miffed if he couldn't comment in some way shape or form I suspect. There isn't a need to taint every thread with negativity, as a matter of fact there are these things called rules! They apply to all in the new fora funnily enough. Have a read sometime perhaps? This could save you a lot of future angst and despair when the moderators take action. It is their job you know *winx BTW: Great you are getting your own club! \o/ That might even pass for creativity in some quarters. Well done and Hugz from 1 creator member of the LWL! Lovely to see things take a positive turn for your new group. ♥¿♥ and nuuu I wont respond to your baiting in the next two posts. 2 in a row! 1/2 a kudos for creativity 8^) We will make a positive contributor of you yet Storm! Baiii Thanks Maryanne, your post just decided something for me. Because, the negativity and rancor seems to be very one-sided in this thread...and it's coming from the LWL crowd. This post of yours directs insults, taunts, negativity and low-blows to another forum poster. BUT, no one in the LWL crowd will call you out for it, will they? If the moderators want to delete a post in this thread, they'd be well served to start with yours. Now, I'm heading inworld to remove myself from the LWL group.

Storm Clarence wrote: Celestiall, I have always enjoyed your opinions on politics. I have always enjoyed reading you. I told Maddy some 15 months ago taht I enjoyed your words. There is no need for you to get my cocktails - I am quite capable of pouring my own. Perhaps I could pour one for you? I have a friend in the LWL group. She tells me they wear barrels. I, too, don't see you as a good 'fit'. Sheesh, I never said I'd make cocktails... lol Am glad to see that you recognize the humor in my comment and have replied with kind. I'll be inworld soonish and will look up your profile. : )