Army Rumour Service

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Education Article - READ

Have you read the other threads that he has started? I bet he is a joy to spend time with.
Is not in the Hole yet?


in_the_cheapseats said:
Is not in the Hole yet?

Alas, no.

Cant be long though. The thread was worth a read IMHO if only to bear witness to Billy's laughable attempts to walt it up as an intellectual.



Book Reviewer
Thomas_Blake said:
105AVRE said:
err...didn't the Vikings discover America :? :twisted:

The Vikings were indeed the first to discover America and they were followed about 450 years later by the Chinese and then Columbus. Of course it could be argued that the first people to actually discover America were the Native American Indians.

However, this is all digressing slightly from what is a thoroughly interesting and informative thread.


Apparently at least four groups migrated into North America from Siberia at between 30,000 years ago and 9,000 years ago (according to some programme on telly I was half watching recently that was waffling on about DNA and waves of settlement across North America)
That was an incredibly dull programme, but it was the height of entertainment compared to the first post on this thread.
smartascarrots said:
Biped said:
The former is capitalism, the latter socialism. In reality, not Legoland, the former far outperforms the latter, and this is why communism has failed globally, and the most succesful countries, as measured by average individual wealth and freedoms are the capitalist ones with a long history of it.

For the last 40 years you've had South Korea, Taiwan and Singapore on the one hand, PRC and PRVN on the other. EU, USA, Canada, et al. somewhere in the middle. By the common contemporary measures of GDP/GNP, economic growth, inflation, that that sort of thing.

Plain fact, measured by some Polish-sounding chap whose name I forget but will look up later - democracies and dictatorships are no better than each other at stimulating economic growth, and democratisation doesn't go hand-in-hand with development. There's a mystical 'something else' that makes the difference.

Found it. Przeworski, A. et al. (1996), 'What makes democracies endure?', Journal of Democracy, 7(1), pp.39-55,

[/quote]Dictatorships are no more likely to generate economic growth than democracies
This thread's still knob, though.
Alright, alright, stop nagging! Having read through this pile of cack (I lied, I got as far as page 2 before my eyes started to bleed) I can only surmise that the best place for this inane rambling is indeed The Hole.