I believe I've noticed how old people are here. You are a generation that's had grace and favour showered down since birth and you show no gratitude for this or any remorse for your mistakes.
As a generation you're depending on beginning forgiven when you do not deserve to be forgiven.
The principles may be hard to live by, but we make the world a better place when we do. The Baby Boomers did not intend to kill and starve the innocent through its own gluttonous excess. But intention isn't the point and ignorance is no excuse.
There's a strong revenge argument for the young of today to do what the young of Mao's cultural revolution did - the mass slaughter of their parents. It is in your self-interest not to breed this way of looking at the world.
Anyway, despite the fact that we can be much more confident of someone's guilt nowadays the support for the death penalty is dropping. Even the Hard Right amongst millennials are now objecting to the death penalty on the principles of pro-life and limited government. What's more empowering of big government than the legality of killing a citizen?
The personal is political.. this is why suffrage should never have been extended to women and men without property. You just don't have the discipline to resist emotion.
So do I. What I believe is quite millennial typical. As a generation we believe in tougher punishments for criminals than what the Baby Boomers believe. Except for the death penalty. We believe in tougher sentences and harsher prisons, but not in killing.
I do not accept that the death penalty is a necessary act of self-defence in a wealthy and civilised nation with other options.
Nothing wrong with the ideals. They've been continent-wide here for many years and almost every civilised country agrees apart from extraterrestrial Japan and the American states teeming with orcs.
Can we forgive those who trespass against us? Maybe. Baby Boomers better hope so or maybe they'll receive a bit of that Maoist treatment. But this isn't the point. I am not the state, I am not King Louis XIV, and even if I was I wouldn't set the law of the land based on what I would do in revenge.
Yes, for some professions such as doctors, lawyers, and teachers. Not anymore for others. In engineering now it's common for a consultant to be paid overtime. That's why I said never.
When your wages are a compensation for the life you're sacrificing by being at work(i.e if you're a worker)then in the whole the answer would be no.
If you're a professional and wages are a by-product of your career then the answer would be yes. This is also why I agree with the old-fashioned(pre-boomer)idea that a professional should never be paid overtime.
This research establishes that the emergence, prevalence, recurrence, and severity of intrastate conflicts in the modern era reflect the long shadow of prehistory. Exploiting variations across national populations, it demonstrates that genetic diversity, as determined predominantly during the exodus of humans from Africa tens of thousands of years ago, has contributed significantly to the frequency, incidence, and onset of both overall and ethnic civil conflict over the last half-century, accounting for a large set of geographical and institutional correlates of conflict, as well as measures of economic development. Furthermore, the analysis establishes the significant contribution of genetic diversity to the intensity of social unrest and to the incidence of intragroup factional conflict. These findings arguably reflect the contribution of genetic diversity to the degree of fractionalization and polarization across ethnic, linguistic, and religious groups in the national population; the adverse influence of genetic diversity on interpersonal trust and cooperation; the contribution of genetic diversity to divergence in preferences for public goods and redistributive policies; and the potential impact of genetic diversity on economic inequality within a society.
Re-population starts tonight with or without her consent. What an opportunity as well to ensure that only the healthiest seed is sown. What's that, son? A clubfoot? You're going over the cliff.
That makes two of us. I never voted labour but the family has traditionally, my Dad was a shop steward in the Sheffield steelworks during the Thatcher-era, and much of the family is from Rotherham so as you can imagine we're almost all UKIP now.
And hopefully our transition from debt/statist charity to peoples' charity will give us all a sense of perspective and boundaries.
My generation will cure AIDS with our phenomenal progress in understanding the human genome and immune system. We'll help Africa this way instead of doling out endless charity-bribes to grinning warlords paid for on the credit card. As an example.
We'll do many great things simply because the lesser things are not on the table. Brilliant things happen without the luxury of the easy way. Necessity is the mother of invention.
The ironic goodside of less pay for more work is charity. It's why the greatest generation were more charitable despite how hard their lives were. You ask a millennial to do something for you and it's more likely that they'll help you without expecting anything in return.
And this will be important as the welfare state gets poorer. The cradle-to-grave let the government be charitable so you don't have to of the boomers is unsustainable. If we want to tackle social miseries we don't have the option of the state and an almost limitless supply of credit.
They inherited a fortune and left a debt of a fortune. The first generation did not accumulate, they squandered lavishly. In China the boomer equivalents accumulated and that's why young Chinese can consume more. In the West the opposite is the case.
I am the generation which grew up with the universal/cosmopolitan society and culture ruled by boomers, but without the easy money which keeps the peace within this unnatural living arrangement. We are the people who would have been upper middle class as boomers and who will now be lower middle class as millennials. We are the generation of less pay for more work.
So much for the past. We will never have the same share of the pie, but if we develop a new industrial revolution as I believe we are doing with tech and machines, we can expand the overall size of the pie so that a smaller slice is enough to live off.
The duty of my technological whizz-kid generation is to be the founders of the 21st century industrial revolution. It's the only way we can create a better life for our children.
Yes, whilst I'm far from being a liberal I still feel sorry for Nick Clegg. I also think he helped curb Tory excess. Now the Tories are in sole power I hope the fact no party ever delivers fully on its program will mean that they don't actually make all the cuts they claim. We'll see.
No history. No experience. Everything for the moment. Memory of a goldfish.
I'd support the West playing a secondary role behind Russia, Turkey, and Iran. Drop our qualms with Assad and support all of these being the face of opposition against ISIS because our own face drives people away.
But you can't have it both ways. Yes we have lost authenticity in religion and elsewhere, but I'd choose the plastics over the fundamentalists. I'd choose decadence over barbarism.
But as you individualise you do dilute the religion down. Religion is more authentic when it's fundamental with those(pre-selected)iron scriptures you must live by.
As you liberalise Christians(or anyone)increasingly become creatures of self-interest and salesmen style making it up as you go along, this is a natural consequence of being free to choose the bits you do and do not like. Basically the Western Christian is as plastic and artificial as the Western person(because he is one).
My contention is that good people find the good in the Bible and it is not the good parts of the Bible which make bad people become good. As you say it's open to interpretation and so it's all in the eyes which interpret.
RE: Capital punishment should be banned ??
being*