Truth about Denmark?

[Diezel]

And yet the thread stayed mostly on topic until you arrived.
Must be a coincidence

Hey, I stayed out of it, until it went off topic! I wasn't the one that brought up football.

They routinely play with broken ankles? No way. I broke my ankle once, and I couldn't have taken a single step with that injury. Not because I'm a whimp (although I am). It just wouldn't have been possible.
Except perhaps with a very loose definition of "broken".

Nope, broken. Donovon McNabb (quarterback) played almost an entire season with a broken ankle.

They wrap that thing up so tight, it is like they have a cast on.

Oh, and don't forget about cortozone. Never forget about cortozone - the NFL's second biggest budget expense, after salary.

 

[Diezel]

Here's a funny article about the ethics of taking out McNabb's ankle (which was already broken) during the play-off game.

http://www.accessatlanta.com/ajc/sports/falcons/0103/07ankle.html

 

[Shane Costello]

Speaking of football, wasn't that a worthless, risible performance by the Danes against England in the World Cup?

 

[mbp]

Speaking of football, wasn't that a worthless, risible performance by the Danes against England in the World Cup?

Very much so. It was most frustrating to watch them give up without a fight after having done quite well in the first round.
The defeat against Spain in 1986 hurts more, though. I still think we could have won that tournament with a bit of luck.
Oh, well. We'll always have 1992.

 

[mbp]

Hey, I stayed out of it, until it went off topic! I wasn't the one that brought up football.

True.
But once you post to a thread it becomes a virtual member of the Banter forum and people assume that anything goes.

Nope, broken. Donovon McNabb (quarterback) played almost an entire season with a broken ankle.

The article you referred to above states that he had a "fractured" ankle. Couldn't this refer to a hairline fracture or splinter knocked off a bone or something like that rather than a real break? (If I understand things correctly a break is a fracture but a fracture is not necessarily a break.)
When an ankle is broken the way mine was, the foot is only attached to the leg by soft tissue. No amount of wrapping up will allow someone to run in that condition.

... and the Falcons should definitely have gone for his ankle. By taking part in the game you declare yourself 100% fit, imho.

 

[Diezel]

True.
But once you post to a thread it becomes a virtual member of the Banter forum and people assume that anything goes.

Hey, I used to be over here all the time. It's not my fault you guys let the place go to the trolls.

The article you referred to above states that he had a "fractured" ankle. Couldn't this refer to a hairline fracture or splinter knocked off a bone or something like that rather than a real break? (If I understand things correctly a break is a fracture but a fracture is not necessarily a break.)
When an ankle is broken the way mine was, the foot is only attached to the leg by soft tissue. No amount of wrapping up will allow someone to run in that condition.

... and the Falcons should definitely have gone for his ankle. By taking part in the game you declare yourself 100% fit, imho.

Very few broken bones are "broken" all the way through, like yours was. That is a special case and usually winds up as a "compound fracture", with the bone coming out through the skin.

Yes, not all "breaks" or fractures are equal, but there is pain involved in every one of them.

 

[mbp]

Getting nearly back on topic now.
Denmark is offering troops for the war against Iraq. Fifty guys from the special forces and a submarine with a crew of twenty people! If this doesn't scare Saddam into exile, nothing will.

 

[Diezel]

Getting nearly back on topic now.
Denmark is offering troops for the war against Iraq. Fifty guys from the special forces and a submarine with a crew of twenty people! If this doesn't scare Saddam into exile, nothing will.

Do you have any clue what your spending per soldier/salior/airman/marine is? I'm thinking, if the numbers quoted earlier were correct (1-2% GDP), Denmark most spend a ton more per body in training, equipment, etc.... This is one of the advanatges Israel has and why they have such a good fighting force.

 

[mbp]

Do you have any clue what your spending per soldier/salior/airman/marine is? I'm thinking, if the numbers quoted earlier were correct (1-2% GDP), Denmark most spend a ton more per body in training, equipment, etc....

According to NATO, we spent 1.5% of our GDP in 2001 whereas the US spent almost 3%. The US had 59 times as many people in the armed forces.
Now, the population of the US is not quite sixty times as large as the Danish, but it's probably somewhere in the fifties. Assuming the GDP per capita to be roughly the same, the average amount spent on an American soldier is quite a bit higher.

It should also be considered that nearly all Danish soldiers are conscripts who only serve for 6-12 months before going into the reserves

The special forces (which is what we sent to Afghanistan and what will possibly be going to Iraq) are a different matter, though, and most likely well trained and equipped.

 

[DanishDynamite]

My Ed, I never should have mentioned bloody football! For a while there, it seemed I was in Banter. And I definitely think there is a connection with Diezel's entrance. Has the old warhorse gone soft?

mbp:

Fifty guys from the special forces and a submarine with a crew of twenty people! If this doesn't scare Saddam into exile, nothing will.

 

[Earthborn]

Rouser still isn't convinced:

Uhh, excuse me? A success for whom? The few who use it, not the many who pay for it.
...
How serving unprofitiable areas makes the bus service cost "less" is a conclusion in defiance of all logic.
...
Obviously, neither the people of Hasslet know what they are really paying, an neither do you.

<BuzzingSound> Wrong! Wrong! Wrong!

http://www.progress.org/sprawl05.htm
http://www.ils.nrw.de/netz/leda/database/measures/meas0270.htm
Oh, heck check them all out yourself:
http://www.google.nl/search?q=hasselt+free+buses&ie=ISO-8859-1&hl=nl&lr=

From here:
http://www.globalideasbank.org/inspir/INS-155.HTML

A year later the use of public transport has increased by a staggering 800 per cent. The merchants are happy because business has increased; there are fewer accidents, fewer road casualties and there has been an increase in social activity.

The same day that the town made the buses free, they also slashed local taxes - the inhabitants of Hasselt are now paying less than they were ten years ago. More people are attracted to Hasselt because it is easier to get there and the extra income has reduced the local taxes.

One of the reasons the measure was adopted was a shortage of funds - the city did not have enough money to expand its roads. Free buses were a cheaper alternative, and it worked. The city had been slowly losing population, but since the new measures were adopted, the population has been rising 25 times faster than it was shrinking.

(Emphasis mine)

 

[Diezel]

My Ed, I never should have mentioned bloody football! For a while there, it seemed I was in Banter. And I definitely think there is a connection with Diezel's entrance. Has the old warhorse gone soft?

My my, I didn't know my reputation had become so sullied by my absence from the "serious" forums. Truth be told, it felt like I had already had the same debates 100 times over and the trolls were taking over anyway, so I thought I would try to stir up some social topics in Banter for awhile.

But, I'm out of retirement!

 

[DanishDynamite]

Diezel:

Truth be told, it felt like I had already had the same debates 100 times over and the trolls were taking over anyway, so I thought I would try to stir up some social topics in Banter for awhile.

Truth be told, I understand how you feel. I used to roam a fair bit in the R&P forum (it was my favorite for a long time), but not only did it become troll infested, it also seemed like all topics had already been debated.

The Politics section at least presents current issues we can bicker about.

But, I'm out of retirement!

Welcome back!

 

[Rouser2]

[
Re: >>"A year later the use of public transport has increased by a staggering 800 per cent."<<

Staggering as well to the businesses involved in making money from private transporation. Cars, tires, repairs, restaurants, gas, oil, etc., etc., etc.

>>The merchants are happy because business has increased; <<

It could be a great deal for merchants -- to have people who don't patronize them provide the funds for the transport of others.

And beware of the fallacy of the Visible as versus the Invisable -- a fallacy that socialists routinely use in pointing to the all the wonderful visible outcomes of their socialist projects. But the invisable transfers of wealth are not so easily seen. And a transfer of wealth is just that. It is not a creation of new wealth.

>>there are fewer accidents, fewer road casualties and there has been an increase in social activity. <<

These are assertions unsupported by any facts from your left leaning links.


>>The same day that the town made the buses free, they also slashed local taxes - the inhabitants of Hasselt are now paying less than they were ten years ago.<<

That's the old Laffer Curve. I wholeheartedly agree. Less taxes means more wealth. More even for the revenooers who steal it.

>>More people are attracted to Hasselt because it is easier to get there <<

Don't know about easier. Cheaper maybe.

>>One of the reasons the measure was adopted was a shortage of funds - the city did not have enough money to expand its roads. Free buses were a cheaper alternative, and it worked. The city had been slowly losing population, but since the new measures were adopted, the population has been rising 25 times faster than it was shrinking. <<

Hmmm. So. does this mean the happy people of Hasslet are having more sex? Or fewer abortions? Or just more people being seduced to come from elsewhere to partake in the freebies?

 

[Earthborn]

Rouser, you just can't tolerate even one little success for the left, can you?

Staggering as well to the businesses involved in making money from private transporation. Cars, tires, repairs, (..), gas, oil, etc., etc., etc.

So you claim that there is less private transportation in Hasselt? Well, that's a claim that requires evidence. I would think that people just go to the city more often, not necessarily making all personal transportation disappear. When I was there, there seemed to be enough cars around...

restaurants

Restaurants? That one you need to explain... Are you claiming that people eat less because the buses are free? Or are you saying that people don't go to restaurants anymore because they could go there by bus for free? I don't get it...

But the invisable transfers of wealth are not so easily seen.

Duh, the invisible man is also not so easily seen.

It is not a creation of new wealth.

Could you explain to a socialist, who so easily falls for such fallacies, when exactly something is 'creation of new wealth' and not just 'an invisible transfer of wealth'. Also carefully explain how you came to the conclusion that it is an 'invisible transfer of wealth' since by definition you could not have seen it yourself!

In my infinitely naive knowledge of economics, I always thought that the most important cornerstone of economics is that when two people trade goods, it is possible that both feel richer. Basically economics is the transfer of goods. If all people involved feel richer it is a creation of wealth is it not?

These are assertions unsupported by any facts from your left leaning links.

So, what? I just quoted it. And I didn't try to make an issue out of it.

That's the old Laffer Curve. I wholeheartedly agree.

Well, see? Even you would have felt better if you lived there!
It's a WIN-WIN situation.

Don't know about easier. Cheaper maybe.

You know just as well as I do that easier and cheaper are sometimes used as synonyms. Easier='Costs less effort' Cheaper='Costs less'.

Or just more people being seduced to come from elsewhere to partake in the freebies?

I'm pretty sure it's exactly that. They live in he city, and pay taxes. Because more people are there paying taxes, less taxes per person are needed. Less taxes, more people are actracted to go live there. And all the while the buses are free!

BTW: Learn to quote and to spell 'Hasselt'

 

[Rouser2]

>>So you claim that there is less private transportation in Hasselt? <<

It's a reasonable inference from your claim of 8 times the ridership on "free" buses, with your claim of fewer accidents, less traffic, etc.

>>Restaurants? That one you need to explain... Are you claiming that people eat less because the buses are free?<<

No. Everybody's got to eat somewhere sometime. And the restaurants that might be patronized along the route by those in private cars logically would get less business if a bus transports them to some other location without the normal periodic stops a private car might make.

>>Could you explain to a socialist, who so easily falls for such fallacies, when exactly something is 'creation of new wealth' and not just 'an invisible transfer of wealth'.<<

If you grow a carrot; you have created wealth for that carrot is worth something. If you trade that carrot for a cup of coffee, no new wealth is created, but only transferred via the exchange.

>>Also carefully explain how you came to the conclusion that it is an 'invisible transfer of wealth' since by definition you could not have seen it yourself!<<


When a freeloader rides a "free" bus. He's sees the visible, the obvious. A free bus ride. But he does not see the guns and the jails that are there in the happy town of Hasselt to intimidate the many to provide the funds for that "free" bus ride. Those guns, jails, and transfers of funds to the Government Bus Agency are largly invisible, especially to the happy freeloading bus riders.

>>In my infinitely naive knowledge of economics, I always thought that the most important cornerstone of economics is that when two people trade goods, it is possible that both feel richer. Basically economics is the transfer of goods. If all people involved feel richer it is a creation of wealth is it not?<<


Yes, both parties feel and are richer. But the transfer of the wealth object remains the same. By trading a fish for a cup of coffee or for a sum of money, there is no creation of new wealth.

>>So, what? I just quoted it. And I didn't try to make an issue out of it.<<

It's not a respected neutral news site, but an organization with a left leaning agenda.

>>I'm pretty sure it's exactly that. They live in he city, and pay taxes. Because more people are there paying taxes, less taxes per person are needed. Less taxes, more people are actracted to go live there. And all the while the buses are free!<<

Don't confuse two separate issues. Less taxes mean more wealth even for the government. But nonetheless, there is no such a thing as a "free" bus ride.

 

[Aardvark_DK]

But he does not see the guns and the jails that are there in the happy town of Hasselt to intimidate the many to provide the funds for that "free" bus ride. Those guns, jails, and transfers of funds to the Government Bus Agency are largly invisible, especially to the happy freeloading bus riders.

Hey, whatever you say, man. Here in Denmark we have something called the NKVD. They are big men dressed completely in black, and they go around to all households where people (aka. slaves) question our communist ways - and those people just conveniently disappear...

'Scuse me, someone's at the door.

 

[Ove]

Rouser2 i'm sorry to say but you are a nutcase. I hereby declare you a Troll and promise never to debate with you anymore.

 

[shuize]

Just by calling something "free" does not make it so. It is not "trolling" to point that out.

 

[Earthborn]

It's a reasonable inference from your claim of 8 times the ridership on "free" buses, with your claim of fewer accidents, less traffic, etc.

It's not my claim, it is the claim of those 'left leaning' sites I linked to.

No. Everybody's got to eat somewhere sometime. And the restaurants that might be patronized along the route by those in private cars logically would get less business if a bus transports them to some other location without the normal periodic stops a private car might make.

You make no sense whatsoever. That the people in private cars make stops on the way to the town? And along the roads to town all kinds of restaurants sprung up to center these people who obviously need to eat every darn minute!

It's a city busservice for cryin' out loud! Everything is just 5 minutes away by car!

If you grow a carrot; you have created wealth for that carrot is worth something. If you trade that carrot for a cup of coffee, no new wealth is created, but only transferred via the exchange.
(...)
Yes, both parties feel and are richer. But the transfer of the wealth object remains the same. By trading a fish for a cup of coffee or for a sum of money, there is no creation of new wealth.

By your definition of the 'creation of wealth', very little wealth is ever created. I could even argue that no wealth is created ever. If you grow a carrot, the soil will have less nutrients left, and that's worth something too!

I use a different definition of the creation of wealth, and I think it is more common umong economists. Suppose one person lives near a well and has enough water. Another person has a wheat field and has enough food. They could increase their wealth by trading: swap some wheat for some water and both are better of. That's wealth being created, except in your definition.

When a freeloader rides a "free" bus. He's sees the visible, the obvious. A free bus ride. But he does not see the guns and the jails that are there in the happy town of Hasselt to intimidate the many to provide the funds for that "free" bus ride. Those guns, jails, and transfers of funds to the Government Bus Agency are largly invisible, especially to the happy freeloading bus riders.

Right... Guns and jails are needed to make people pay less taxes. Those whacky europeans love paying taxes so much, that the government needs to do everything it can to prevent them from paying too much. Right... That made sense.

How about 'all the guns and jails' in a happy town outside of the Hasselt municipal boundaries that are needed to intimidate people paying for the bus fare? Why would that be alright all of a sudden?

Don't confuse two separate issues. Less taxes mean more wealth even for the government. But nonetheless, there is no such a thing as a "free" bus ride.

Indeed, but there are a number of ways to pay for it. This is one of them and nobody involved is complaining about it.