Seaga Reasoning

[Tuff Gong]

Re: Seaga Reasoning

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: johnnycakes</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Manley and Seaga did not solve any of Jamaica's problems.</div></div>

Again you repeat a lie!

Therefore we need not hear the so-called Cuba Story, if you are willing to lie in such a disgraceful manner why continue?
Any self-respecting Jamaican should/would not want to continue on such an idiotic line unless that Jamaican was cut from the same dishonest fabric as you are.

[johnnycakes]

Re: Seaga Reasoning

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Tuff Gong</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: johnnycakes</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Manley and Seaga did not solve any of Jamaica's problems.</div></div>

Again you repeat a lie!

Therefore we need not hear the so-called Cuba Story, if you are willing to lie in such a disgraceful manner why continue?
Any self-respecting Jamaican should/would not want to continue on such an idiotic line unless that Jamaican was cut from the same dishonest fabric as you are. </div></div>
D
Tuff Going,

Well I guess I missed the past 25 years. Maybe you could list all the problems that the twin parties of capitalism fixed in Jamaica while I was doing a Rip Van Winkle.

The debt is considerably larger isn't it.
The crime figures now have Jamaica THIRD in the world in murders don't they?
20% of children in Jamaica don't go to school and what is the illiteracy rate?.
Hospitals and medical care is so bad that the hated Cubans are doing eye surgery on thousands of Jamaicans who can't otherwise afford it in the basically privatised healthcare system whose motto is "Your Money Or Your Life" (same as in the U.S.)

What are the unemployment and underemployment figures?
What is the poverty rate doing? Up or down?

What kind of fantasy world is it that you exist in and write from?


An announcement:
As of today I will be posting the ad hominems (personal attacks) that Tuffy finds necessary in his debating style rather than discuss particulars.
Today's ad hominems are:
Liar (lie twice)
Disgraceful
Idiotic
Dishonest

[Tuff Gong]

Re: Seaga Reasoning

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: johnnycakes</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> As of today I will be posting the ad hominems (personal attacks) that Tuffy finds necessary in his debating style rather than discuss particulars.
Today's ad hominems are:
Liar (lie twice)
Disgraceful
Idiotic
Dishonest
</div></div>

What are you saying you did not tell those lies?
Any argument that both Menlie and Eddie did not solve any of Jamaica's problems is idiotic, just how is this an ad hominem attack on you?
I think is a disgraceful show of dishonesty to keep repeating idiotic, babble such as you have posted.

[Skellion]

Re: Seaga Reasoning

TG would you kindly explain to me what both Manley and Seaga have done to solve any problems in Jamaica. I am not speaking of the attempts that they have made to have new systems implemented. I am speaking about long term effects here.

[johnnycakes]

Re: Seaga Reasoning

Tuff Going,

A lie is an untrue statement that is meant to deceive and while it is always possible that I may be in error, I have a policy of not lying since it tends to discredit anything else I might have to say in the future. It is not too dissimilar to resorting to ad hominems when your argument fails.

Noe back to the issues under discussion:
Exactly which of Jamaica's major problems were the JLP and/or the PNP able to solve.

Maybe a better question would be which of those problems have not been exacerbated by the policies and neo-liberal economic "reforms" followed by the two parties?

Answer the questions.


Today's second list of ad hominems:
Liar ( lies)
Idiotic
Disgraceful
Dishonest
idiotic babble (two in one)

[Morpheous]

Re: Seaga Reasoning

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Tuff Gong</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Dr.Dudd</div><div class="ubbcode-body">At least Mr Manley has a degree in economics from London School of economics. Mr Seaga does not have a degree in economics.
Thay is the reason why I don't think that he is intentionally misleading th epublic.I believe that He is genuinly limited in the field. </div></div>

LOL!

I was waiting for you to make that very import distinction.
So Menlie with his degree from LSOE destroyed the economy in two terms. Eddie Blinds with no such distinction build it forward, and then Menlie and his crew came forward to destroy it?

Again why wi neva keep Eddie Blinds?
</div></div>
Between Manley & Seaga, I choose none! Never trust any politician! Between them they have divided Jamaica (permanently) into political war zones where brother kills brother.

[Tuff Gong]

Re: Seaga Reasoning

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: More4us</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Between Manley & Seaga, I choose none! Never trust any politician! Between them they have divided Jamaica (permanently) into political war zones where brother kills brother. </div></div>This is not a question relating Menlie or Eddie specifically, but tell me this.
How else can a country be organized and run without a political system?

[Tuff Gong]

Re: Seaga Reasoning

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: I_n_I</div><div class="ubbcode-body">TG would you kindly explain to me what both Manley and Seaga have done to solve any problems in Jamaica. I am not speaking of the attempts that they have made to have new systems implemented. I am speaking about long term effects here. </div></div>I think it is a dishonest question. On the one hand you are excluding nothing by saying any of, then on the other you are excluding new systems and qualifying the question with long-term effects.

The other thing is Menlie and Eddie could not both try to solve our problems. One was in Opposition and the other was the head of the Government. Under the West Minister System the Government hold all or most of the cards, except where a percentage majority is needed to pass certain bills.

So you like my other friend is all over the place.
Read Eddie Blinds article and you will see what politics is about similar problems presents itself and each leader when they have the reins approach it in a different fashion.

In Menlie's case most often it was based on political expediency and in Eddie's case (according to one member here), it was based on common sense.

[Dyoll_73]

Re: Seaga Reasoning

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">... it is always possible that I may be in error...</div></div>

On 'purist' socialism, definitely yes! With you, everthing is easily reduced to the evils of capitalism - a belief that is stunningly oversimplistic. This oversimplificaton causes you to think that anyone who disagrees with you is a rabid capitalist. You do great damage to your credibility there.

But I think you're right on the Israeli/Palestinian issue.

[johnnycakes]

Re: Seaga Reasoning

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Dyoll_73</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">... it is always possible that I may be in error...</div></div>

On 'purist' socialism, definitely yes! With you, everthing is easily reduced to the evils of capitalism - a belief that is stunningly oversimplistic. This oversimplificaton causes you to think that anyone who disagrees with you is a rabid capitalist. You do great damage to your credibility there.

But I think you're right on the Israeli/Palestinian issue. </div></div>


Dyoll,

Is it not true that because of the distribution of goods and services being determined by the possession of money is what causes the deaths of tens of millions each tear in the Third World and is that not capitalism?

Does not Cuba under the alternative system of distributing the goods and services utilizing socialism feedd, house cloth educate and otherwise provide the basic necessities of life to EVERY one of its people?

That may be simple but it is neither simplistic nor untrue.

I do not say that any one who disagrees with me is a rabid capitalist but if you agree with the fact that capitalism has not and cannot do what socialism has done then, yes you are a rabid capitalist because there is not a speck of evidence anywhere that points to capitalism's ability to provide for all. To continue to either tout or in any other way support what you have to admit is a killer economic system is just sick.

How can you otherwise define support for a system that has a built-in disregard for those at the bottom and those at the bottom comprise some 20-25% of the people on this Earth.?

I don't, in the least, ever worry about my credibility nor do have to worry about my morality.

You may consider my thinking "stunningly simplistic" and I'm sure you can come up with some justification for the continued existence of capitalism in the face of the devastation it causes, in light of the deaths of tens of millions of men women and children it causes.

I just don't know how you can live at peace with yourself doing so.

You seem to express sympathy for the beleaguered Palestineans. What about the 12 millions who slowly die of starvation in the world ?

Finally, Purist socialism? You either have a socialist system or you don't. Purist in my way of thinking would mean that the needs of the people always comes before anyone else's right to sit on the money and/or resources required to provide the basic needs for all.

After those basic needs for all are taken care of, I don't care who has how much money or how many yachts and anyone who wants more than the basics should be able to work and earn the extra money needed but without exploiting anyone else.

[Skellion]

Re: Seaga Reasoning

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Tuff Gong</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: I_n_I</div><div class="ubbcode-body">TG would you kindly explain to me what both Manley and Seaga have done to solve any problems in Jamaica. I am not speaking of the attempts that they have made to have new systems implemented. I am speaking about long term effects here. </div></div>I think it is a dishonest question. On the one hand you are excluding nothing by saying any of, then on the other you are excluding new systems and qualifying the question with long-term effects.

The other thing is Menlie and Eddie could not both try to solve our problems. One was in Opposition and the other was the head of the Government. Under the West Minister System the Government hold all or most of the cards, except where a percentage majority is needed to pass certain bills.

So you like my other friend is all over the place.
Read Eddie Blinds article and you will see what politics is about similar problems presents itself and each leader when they have the reins approach it in a different fashion.

In Menlie's case most often it was based on political expediency and in Eddie's case (according to one member here), it was based on common sense.



</div></div>


You are evading the question posed.

Earlier in one of your responses you said:
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> Any argument that both Menlie and Eddie did not solve any of Jamaica's problems is idiotic </div></div>


I ask you to tell me how they have done so.

Your rebuttal is:

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Menlie and Eddie could not both try to solve our problems. </div></div>

So tell me clearly where do you stand on the issue because both responses conflict.


And with regards to your comment on my being all over the place, how is that so? Because I have asked you to exclude short term success that lasted only in the duration of Seaga and Manley's term?

[Tuff Gong]

Re: Seaga Reasoning

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: I_n_I</div><div class="ubbcode-body">You are evading the question posed.

Earlier in one of your responses you said:
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> Any argument that both Menlie and Eddie did not solve any of Jamaica's problems is idiotic </div></div>


I ask you to tell me how they have done so.

Your rebuttal is:

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Menlie and Eddie could not both try to solve our problems. </div></div>

So tell me clearly where do you stand on the issue because both responses conflict.


And with regards to your comment on my being all over the place, how is that so? Because I have asked you to exclude short term success that lasted only in the duration of Seaga and Manley's term?



</div></div>
I am not evading the question @ all.

Let's break it down.

(1) it would be almost impossible to say with a straight face that an Administration have never solved any problems.

(2) it would well nigh impossible to say with any certainty, that any solution, even when designed for the long term will last forever (I am assuming that long term means forever)

(3) with your further qualifications of &lt;&gt; short term, &lt;&gt; new, you have virtually rendered the question unanswerable.

The way Government should work is for the whole, not just for the members of the Cabinet or the Leadership of the Party.
So even if one Government solved a problem, but the Citizens are not feeling that Government, it is put out of power, but that does not mean it ever solved a problem.

Continuing on the same line, when the new Government comes in technically they are supposed to build on the good legacy of the previous Administration, then solve any other problems that they inherited or occurs during their time at the helm.

The sad thing is, in Jamaica political expediency is often used as the measuring stick, therefore many good and worthwhile solutions have been tanked simply because it was done under a previous Administration. Of course the same political expediency have been used to change the name and the stated goals of a solution while keeping the ghost of that solution. There are many examples.

So to make the point you and the other member have rendered the question impossible to answer, it would be better to pin point a problem that you consider to be a long term problem and say?:

was a solution attempted
why are we still having this problem.

I am also curious to know why the focus on two Prime Ministers with regards to problems that were solved, when we have had 7 Leaders, not counting Portia Simpson-Miller, since just before Independence?

[johnnycakes]

Re: Seaga Reasoning

I_n_I,

Thank you so much.

[Tuff Gong]

Re: Seaga Reasoning

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: johnnycakes</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I_n_I,

Thank you so much. </div></div>

LOL!

[johnnycakes]

Re: Seaga Reasoning


I am also curious to know why the focus on two Prime Ministers with regards to problems that were solved, when we have had 7 Leaders, not counting Portia Simpson-Miller, since just before Independence?
[/quote]

Thank you Tuffy,

Exactly my point all along.
The two parties have no solutions to the problems because they are inherent in and caused by the combination of neo-liberal and neo-colonial economics and an electoral system that is fixed to serve the purposes of that economic system.

In your grudging response to I_n_I you have fairly well agreed with my positions though couching it in a more favorable terms than warranted.

Thank you too.