奥巴马通过电视镜头向全世界公然叫骂
WJ87
无产阶级煽动家
1楼 大 中 小 发表于 2010-5-19 17:19 只看该作者
奥巴马通过电视镜头向全世界公然叫骂
作者：北海月
奥巴马原话的视频：
http://www.tudou.com/programs/view/ZVcIZGHXgS0
奥巴马通过电视镜头向全世界明确宣布：如果10多亿中国人口也过上与美国和澳大利亚同样的生活，那将是人类的悲剧和灾难，地球根本承受不了。奥巴马声称，中国领导人会立刻无条件地立刻同意他这个观点。至于会立刻（注意是立刻而没有丝毫迟疑）同意奥巴马观点的中国领导人是谁，奥巴马没有说出来。
如果全世界60亿人都过上美国那样的富裕生活，至少需要30多个地球资源，而我们只有一个地球。要保证地球资源不会枯竭而又要维持盎格鲁·撒克逊人的富裕生活，在客观上就只有一个选择：迫使其他国家改变发展方向，绝对不能达到西方生活水平。
中国就成为盎格鲁·撒克逊人最成功的实验，一方面，无限制地消耗中国的资源，西方二十多个发达国家十多亿人口，家家都有中国产品，中国完全变成了西方发达国家的资源基地；另一方面，又通过市场化改革把中国绝大多数人口牢牢锁死在贫困状态，保证中国绝大部分资源只是源源不断地供应发达国家。所以，当太平洋和大西洋所有航道上几乎塞满了装运中国货物的轮船时，美国等西方国家从没有想到中国乃至世界的资源枯竭问题，而是津津乐道地称赞中国改革开放的伟大。可是现在，中国想要改变发展方式，把这些资源用于改变本国老百姓的贫困生活时，美国等西方国家却提出了资源问题，提出了碳排放问题，提出了对地球和人类的威胁问题——甚至连中国是不是依靠自身资源实现富裕生活都不管——只要是过富裕生活就是对人类和地球的威胁。
用当下一句时髦的话来说，就是世界上有不讲理的，可是没有见过如此不讲理的。中国把自己的资源几乎无偿地送往美国等西方国家，就是改革开放的伟大进步；如果把自己的资源用于自己人民的生活，就是人类的灾难，就是对地球的威胁，就是全世界的公敌。如此不讲道理的欺负人，可以说是古今中外莫此为甚。
Terminusbot 整理，讨论请前往 2049bbs.xyz
光明的格里高利
八卦爱好者
2楼 大 中 小 发表于 2010-5-19 17:20 只看该作者
没说错啊
原文看了没？很有道理啊
DarkStar
自由主义真正关心的只是底线问题，而其它主义者关心的大多是蓝图问题，中国大陆的自由主义者除外。
3楼 大 中 小 发表于 2010-5-19 17:29 只看该作者
扯
要这样 64之后封锁你就行了
nkpoper
4楼 大 中 小 发表于 2010-5-19 17:36 只看该作者
这个话中国方面确实是说过，不仅中国方面有人说过，而且圣雄甘地也说过。当时，有人问圣雄甘地，什么时候印度能够达到英国当时的生活水平。圣雄甘地就说了这么一套话，大意就是说：英国靠半个地球来维持其生活水准，印度那么多人口，得多少个地球啊！怎么可能？
很多年以前，我还就这个（中国人和圣雄甘地的说法）写过一篇文章，大意就是：
圣雄甘地认为印度不可能达到英国的生活水平，那是1950年左右的事。那个时候英国的生活水平，真的很高么？从某些角度看，印度当然是永远也不可能达成；比方说一些特殊的奢侈品供应，全球的产量就那么一点，全给印度也不够啊！但是，如果认为印度、中国这样的人口大国的生活水平，从总体上看就永远不可能达到1950年英国水平，那就是太小看社会进步的力量了。
所以说，圣雄甘地是错的，假以时日，印度终究可以超过1950年的英国水平；那些认为中国人永远也达不到现在美国生活水平的人，也是错的。
不过，这个话从奥巴马嘴里说出来，就不合适了，这就不是错不错的问题了，而是傻逼的问题了。当然，奥巴马本来就是傻逼，一向是傻逼…….
木乔庄
草泥马派代表
5楼 大 中 小 发表于 2010-5-19 17:38 只看该作者
不太理解这个标题
太激愤鸟
nkpoper
6楼 大 中 小 发表于 2010-5-19 17:42 只看该作者
引用:
原帖由 木乔庄 于 2010-5-19 17:38 发表
太激愤鸟
对WJ87的文章，要本着“挑出其中有价值的内容”的精神去看，不能本着“看看有什么错”的精神去看，把错误一一挑出来，会累死的。这个题目错误，根本不值得挑啊。
laoyang
尘世中一个迷途小书童
7楼 大 中 小 发表于 2010-5-19 18:00 只看该作者
LZ，你能把他演讲的英文稿拿出来看看吗
nkpoper
8楼 大 中 小 发表于 2010-5-19 18:02 只看该作者
引用:
原帖由 laoyang 于 2010-5-19 18:00 发表
LZ，你能把他演讲的英文稿拿出来看看吗
倒不用英文手稿，那个视频里有原话（声音），有中文字幕，且听起来没翻译错。
光明的格里高利
八卦爱好者
9楼 大 中 小 发表于 2010-5-19 18:07 只看该作者
引用:
原帖由 nkpoper 于 2010-5-19 17:42 发表
对WJ87的文章，要本着“挑出其中有价值的内容”的精神去看，不能本着“看看有什么错”的精神去看，把错误一一挑出来，会累死的。这个题目错误，根本不值得挑啊。
特别小黑这个傻逼的演讲，这么说很正常
再说，我也觉得中国人都要达到澳洲的生活水平，的确需要另一个地球来开发
左岸←右岸
把你的子宫钉到我的墙上，这样我便会记得你。我们必须走了。明天，明天…
10楼 大 中 小 发表于 2010-5-19 18:12 只看该作者
他也走平均主义的路线吗
就和那些叫嚣人口问题的专家一样 “要是允许人自由生育，中国还有地方吗？”
胺氰聚三郎
怪组员
11楼 大 中 小 发表于 2010-5-19 18:46 只看该作者
如果这段话说的是节能减排
那么就完全没有任何不恰当的地方
毕竟人家现在也在自己国内推动这个事情
胺氰聚三郎
怪组员
12楼 大 中 小 发表于 2010-5-19 18:50 只看该作者
果然如此，我会不会又知道得太多了？
奥巴马4/14接受澳大利亚广播公司采访时的谈话
http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2010/s2872726.htm
关于气候变化问题与中国的关系的一段
KERRY: 你认为你和胡主席在这方面（气候变化问题）取得了进展吗？
OBAMA:
你知道我认为中国对于解决这一问题有巨大的兴趣。你知道如果你和中国的领导人谈过，我想他们将会立即认识到，如果超过十亿的中国人具有与澳大利亚和美国人目前同样的生话方式，那么我们所有人都将处于一个非常悲惨的境地，地球会无法承受，所以他们明白他们将不得不作出决定，采取一种新的可持续的模式，使得他们在追求他们正在追求的经济增长的同时，解决造成的环境方面的后果。所以我认为他们非常明智地理解这一点。虽然现在可以理解他们脱口而出的是让发达国家，澳大利亚，美国，来首先解决这个问题，我们在我们的生活水平赶上来一点后再来面对它。我们极力要表明的一点就是我们不能，我们不允许中国等待。我们必须承担责任，做我们需要做的，但如果新兴国家中不只是中国，而且印度，巴西以及其他国家都在追求一条在碳排放量上取代我们的的老大地位的道路的话，那不是一个可承受的现实的途径，所以我们准备要所有人在同一跑道上同时行动。
胺氰聚三郎
怪组员
13楼 大 中 小 发表于 2010-5-19 18:53 只看该作者
全文在此
Face to face with Obama
Australian Broadcasting Corporation
Broadcast: 14/04/2010
Reporter: 7.30 Report
Kerry O’Brien speaks exclusively to United States President Barack Obama at
the White House in Washington. The President confirms plans to visit Australia
in June with his family and offers insights about the war in Afghanistan,
China’s emergence as an economic power and climate change.
Transcript
KERRY O’BRIEN: PRESIDENT OBAMA WELCOME TO AUSTRALIAN TELEVISION.
PRESIDENT OBAMA:Thank you so much.
KERRY O’BRIEN: YOU’VE HAD SOME UNDERSTANDABLE HICCUPS TRYING TO GET TO OUR
PART OF THE WORLD.
PRESIDENT OBAMA: Right.
KERRY O’BRIEN: IS JUNE LOCKED IN FOR YOUR FIRST VISIT, AND HOW LONG WILL YOU
BE ABLE TO STAY?
PRESIDENT OBAMA: Well we are definitely looking at travelling in June and my
hope is that we can stay at least a couple of days, I want to be able to take
Michelle and hopefully the girls to Sydney as well as Canberra and…
KERRY O’BRIEN: BECAUSE YOU’VE GOT MEMORIES?
PRESIDENT OBAMA: I’ve got wonderful memories, I used to travel through
Australia when my mother was living in Indonesia and my grandparents were
living in Hawaii, and so we’d usually go through Sydney and memories I have
not only of it being a beautiful country but of people being just wonderfully
hospitable and kind to me are ones that I carry with me.
KERRY O’BRIEN: WELL WE’D SEE THAT AS A GREAT INVESTMENT
PRESIDENT OBAMA: Thank you.
KERRY O’BRIEN: PRESIDENTS AND PRIME MINISTERS ALWAYS TALK ABOUT A SPECIAL US-
AUSTRALIAN RELATIONSHIP AND ONE OF YOUR SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIALS
TALKED ABOUT A MEETING OF MINDS
PRESIDENT OBAMA:Yeah
KERRY O’BRIEN: BETWEEN YOU AND KEVIN RUDD. IS THERE A MEETING OF MINDS?
PRESIDENT OBAMA: I really do think there is, you know Kevin is somebody who I
probably share as much of a world view as any world leader out there, I find
him smart but humble, he works wonderfully well in multilateral settings, he’s
always constructive, incisive. And, you know I think he is like me a pragmatic
person, I think he comes to the job wanting to provide better opportunities
not just for this generation but for the next but I think you know he’s
somebody who isn’t an academic, or just thinking about abstract ideas, I think
he’s constantly thinking in very practical terms about how to get something
done.
KERRY O’BRIEN:AFGHANISTAN WILL OBVIOUSLY BE ON YOUR AGENDA WHEN YOU TWO MEET.
YOU ONCE FAMOUSLY SAID OF THE WAR IN IRAQ: “I’M NOT OPPOSED TO ALL WARS. I’M
OPPOSED TO DUMB WARS.”
PRESIDENT OBAMA: Right.
KERRY O’BRIEN:IS AFGHANISTAN NOW AT RISK OF BECOMING A DUMB WAR?
PRESIDENT OBAMA: No I think Afghanistan is a necessary mission. It’s a
difficult one but it’s a necessary one. Obviously the reason we are there is
very clearly defined, Al Qaeda used it as a launching point for an attack that
killed 3000 Americans and persons of all nationalities and ethnicities. We
have to root out the terrorist networks that are able to mount not just the
sorts of attacks that we saw on 9/11 but also the sorts of attacks we saw on
Bali that had such a devastating attack on Australian nationals. Australia is
the largest non-NATO contributor to our efforts there, we are grateful for the
sacrifice and Prime Minister Rudd and I are in constant consultation about how
we move that effort forward in a way that stabilises Afghanistan, that trains
up Afghan security forces so that we are able to remove our security forces
but we have confidence that Afghan will not return to a launching point for Al
Qaeda operations
KERRY O’BRIEN: SO YOUR OBJECTIVES ARE CLEAR
PRESIDENT OBAMA: Absolutely
KERRY O’BRIEN: WHICH IS WHAT COLIN POWELL SAID AFTER THE EVENT ABOUT VIETNAM.
THE LESSON ABOUT VIETNAM WAS HAVE CLEAR OBJECTIVES AND KNOW THAT YOU CAN WIN,
SO THE FIRST OF THAT IS CORRECT, BUT WHEN YOU STARTED CAMPAIGNING FOR THE
PRESIDENCY, YOU TALKED OF THE WAR IN AFGHANISTAN BEING IN ITS SEVENTH YEAR.
IT’S NOW IN ITS NINTH YEAR, AMERICA’S IN DEEPER, AND THE SITUATION DOESN’T
APPEAR TO BE GETTING ANY BETTER. YOU’RE NOT HEARING THE ECHOES OF VIETNAM IN
THAT ARE YOU?
PRESIDENT OBAMA: Well, I would dispute the notion that it’s not getting
better. I do think that what we’ve seen is a blunting of the momentum of the
Taliban which had been building up in the year prior to me taking office. I
think that you’ve seen actually some reforms in the Karzai government that
allow us to then actually get civilian help to ordinary Afghans and that then
builds trust in the government, so I think we’ve got some positive trends but
there is no doubt that this is a difficult task, and what I have said is that
we need to begin drawing down our troops in 2011, and start handing over more
and more responsibility to the Afghans, we can’t be there in perpetuity
neither the American people nor the Australian people should be asked to carry
that burden any longer than it needs to be carried.
KERRY O’BRIEN:HOW DID YOU REACT WHEN PRESIDENT KARZAI’S RECENTLY REPORTED
COMMENTS WERE FIRST CONVEYED TO YOU, THAT IF HE WAS PUT UNDER MORE PRESSURE,
HE MIGHT JOIN THE TALIBAN?
PRESIDENT OBAMA: Well you know I don’t take news reports of comments
necessarily that seriously, I wait until I hear directly from a world leader,
I know I’m misquoted a lot and you know what I do think is he’s a proud man, I
think he has a strong sense of Afghan nationalism, and he’s under a very
difficult circumstance. Look, this is a country that has gone through three
decades of extraordinary turmoil, he is trying to rebuild a sense of a
national government when that is not a tradition that’s been there for a long
time and so he’s under enormous pressure, but what we have said is that we
can’t succeed unless President Karzai moves forward on the reforms that are so
necessary for Afghans to see a real investment in their lives day to day and
improvement in their lives day to day
KERRY O’BRIEN:BUT OF COURSE, HE ALSO SAID JUST BEFORE THAT ATTRIBUTED COMMENT
THAT FOREIGNERS WERE BEHIND THE FRAUD, BEHIND THE FRAUD IN LAST YEAR’S
ELECTION, WHICH EVEN YOUR OWN PRESS SECRETARY HAS DESCRIBED AS UNTRUTHFUL, AS
HE ALSO DESCRIBED THOSE OTHER COMMENTS AS TROUBLING. IS PRESIDENT KARZAI
STABLE ENOUGH AND WORTHY ENOUGH TO DESERVE YOUR BACKING AT A COST OF AMERICAN
AND COALITION LIVES?
PRESIDENT OBAMA: Well I think that President Karzai is capable of leading his
country into the 21st Century and stabilising it. As I said he’s got a tough
task but the reason we’re there ultimately is not to support one man. The
reason we’re there is because it’s necessary for our national security, we
think it’s necessary for the world’s security that we dismantle Al Qaeda and
its affiliate networks, and we need a strong partner in that process, I think
Karzai has the capacity to be that strong partner and I think that we’re going
to have to keep on both respecting the sovereignty of Afghanistan and Karzai
as the duly elected leader but continue to put pressure on him to make the
kinds of reforms and improvements that will not only mean success for us but
also ultimately success for him.
KERRY O’BRIEN: LAST QUESTION ON AFGHANISTAN. IT WAS REPORTED IN AUSTRALIA IN
MARCH THAT GENERAL McCHRYSTAL IN A PHONE CONVERSATION WITH AUSTRALIA’S DEFENCE
FORCE CHIEF, QUOTE: “WARNED THAT THE RUDD GOVERNMENT’S REFUSAL TO ALLOW
AUSTRALIAN TROOPS TO TAKE THE FIGHT TO THE TALIBAN WAS IMPAIRING THE WAR
EFFORT”. WERE YOU AWARE OF THE GENERAL’S FRUSTRATION AND WOULD YOU LIKE TO SEE
AUSTRALIA DOING MORE THAN IT IS?
PRESIDENT OBAMA: You know I won’t comment on the reports of this particular
conversation it’s not one that came to me. I think that Australia has made
enormous sacrifices and an enormous investment both on the military side and
on the civilian side, they’ve been a very strong partner and America is
grateful for that.
KERRY O’BRIEN: YOU’VE DESCRIBED NUCLEAR TERRORISM AS AMERICA’S GREATEST RISK
IN THE SHORT AND LONG TERM, BUT CLIMATE CHANGE HAS ALSO BEEN DESCRIBED AS THE
GREATEST SINGLE RISK TO HUMANITY. YOU MET CHINESE PRESIDENT HU ON MONDAY. DID
YOU TWO MAKE ANY PROGRESS ON CLIMATE CHANGE, BECAUSE SURELY THE SOLUTION IS
LARGELY IN THE END IN YOUR HANDS AND HIS?
PRESIDENT OBAMA: Well I would dispute that any two countries can dictate a
solution here, we’re going to have to have an investment by all nations in
dealing with what I think is a very real problem. Australia has a significant
carbon footprint just like we do, and certainly per capita, our two countries
have some of the biggest carbon footprints. So we’re going to have to make an
effort, I think the Copenhagen accord was progress and by the way Kevin Rudd’s
participation in that was critical in helping us move the ball down the field.
What we have for the first time is all countries documenting the mitigation
efforts that they’re willing to make and that’s extremely significant. We’re
going to have to do more though, and I know that both in the United States and
in Australia, there is a concern that somehow there is a conflict between
economic growth on the one hand and dealing aggressively with climate change.
What I’ve been trying to say here in the United States and I would say to the
world is that if we focus our attention, our ingenuity, our innovative
capacity on transforming from a fossil fuel based economy to a clean energy
based economy then potentially we can not only solve the problem of climate
change but unleash an enormous amount of economic growth for the future but
it’s going to take some time, and there’s going to be some transition and
people are understandably resistant. It is always difficult to make big
changes like the ones required for climate change in the midst of a very bad
economic crisis and we’ve had the worst one since the 1930s. So, I’m confident
though that you know ultimately humanity has a way of responding not always as
timely as, on as timely basis as we would like, but when we start facing down
potential catastrophe, humanity adapts and I think we will this time as well.
KERRY O’BRIEN: DO YOU FEEL THAT YOU ARE MAKING HEADWAY WITH PRESIDENT HU ON
THIS FRONT?
PRESIDENT OBAMA: Well you know I think China has an enormous interest in
solving this problem. You know if you talk to Chinese leaders I think they
will acknowledge immediately that if over a billion Chinese citizens have the
same living patterns as Australians and Americans do right now then all of us
are in for a very miserable time, the planet just can’t sustain it, so they
understand that they’ve got to make a decision about a new model that is more
sustainable that allows them to pursue the economic growth that they’re
pursuing while at the same time dealing with these environmental consequences.
So I think they understand intellectually. Right now though they’re
understandable impulse is to say well let’s let the developed countries, the
Australias, and the Americas deal with this problem first and we’ll get to it
when we’ve caught up a little bit in terms of our standard of living. The
point we’ve tried to make is we can’t, we can’t allow China to wait. We have
to take responsibility and do what needs to be done, but if emerging countries
not just China but also India, Brazil and others are pursuing a path in which
they replace us as the largest carbon emitters, that’s not a sustainable
practical approach, so we’re going to have to have everybody moving on the
same track at the same time.
KERRY O’BRIEN: ARE AS YOU AS WEDDED TO, ARE YOU AS CONVINCED THAT A CARBON
TRADING SCHEME IS THE BEST WAY TO GO, THE BEST WAY TO GET EMISSIONS DOWN AS
KEVIN RUDD IS?
PRESIDENT OBAMA: I think that, I am absolutely convinced you have to put a
price on carbon of some sort, so there are a number of ways of doing that, you
could do a carbon tax, you can do a cap and trade system which is what
originally I had suggested, very similar to the program that Kevin Rudd has
proposed, but the key is to change incentives for the market place, where we
are actually pricing these pollutants that are going into our atmosphere, if a
price is placed on them, if industry has to take them into account then we can
count on the market place responding effectively. If it’s free to pollute then
you’re never going to have a, companies making all the myriad decisions that
are required in order for the entire system to move in a better direction, and
it’s never sufficient for a command and control system in which government is
trying to chase down every single polluter. What you have to do is have a
market mechanism to make it work more efficiently.
KERRY O’BRIEN: TO COME BACK TO CHINA, AMERICA HAS BEEN THE WORLD’S MOST
POWERFUL NATION FOR A CENTURY. BUT GIVEN THE PROJECTIONS THAT CHINA IS WELL ON
THE WAY TO BECOMING THE WORLD’S BIGGEST ECONOMY, WITH ALL THAT THAT
POTENTIALLY DELIVERS INCLUDING GREATER POLITICAL MUSCLE, HOW HARD IS IT GOING
TO BE FOR AMERICANS TO ADJUST IN A MATURE WAY TO THE INCREASING PROSPECT THAT
YOU CAN’T BE NUMBER ONE FOREVER?
PRESIDENT OBAMA: Oh you know I don’t think about this as a zero sum gain, I
actually think that America can be number one for a very very long time but we
think that there can be a whole host of countries that are prospering and
doing well. Here’s one way to think about it. The Chinese standard of living
and industrial output per capita is about where the United States was back in
1910, I mean they’ve got a lot of catching up to do.
KERRY O’BRIEN:THEY DO
PRESIDENT OBAMA: It is in our interests, both of our countries interests for
China to be successful, for China to be prosperous, because that means they’re
more likely to be stable, that means they’re more likely to be able to deal
with issues like the energy efficiency of their industries, and reduce
pollution, and so we’re not interested in constraining China, we want China to
do well. The only thing we want to make sure of is that a country like China
as it is growing and inevitably will end up being the largest economy just
because of the enormous size of their population, that they are also taking
their international responsibilities seriously and that they recognise that
with great power comes great responsibility.
KERRY O’BRIEN: IN YOUR LANDMARK SPEECH IN 2004 YOU SAID AMERICA’S GENIUS WAS
ITS FAITH IN SIMPLE DREAMS. AS YOU LOOK ACROSS THE LANDSCAPE OF AMERICA’S
WORKING FAMILIES TODAY FOR MANY OF THEM THERE’S NOT A LOT TO DREAM ABOUT;
STILL NEARLY 10 PERCENT UNEMPLOYMENT; A LOT OF UNDER-EMPLOYMENT; A BIG ARMY OF
WORKING POOR. WITH THE HEALTH BILL BEHIND YOU NOW, IS THAT YOUR BIGGEST
CHALLENGE FOR THE REST OF THIS TERM?
PRESIDENT OBAMA: Making sure that not only we’re dealing with the short term
problems in the economy that come out of the financial crisis but laying the
foundation for long term economic growth is absolutely our biggest challenge.
I’m optimistic that we can do it, but there are some legs to the stool that
have to be put in place. Having a reformed health care system was one of them,
having a strong financial regulatory system so that we never have the kind of
financial crisis on Wall Street that we saw again that’s a second component. A
third component is what we just talked about in respect to energy, having a
shift from the old energy models to a new energy model that’s more efficient
and more self sustaining, that’s a third leg. Improving our education system
which historically has always been the driver of extraordinary economic growth
but frankly you know if you compare the per capita performance of kids in
Singapore at this point to kids in the United States when it comes to things
like Math and Science, we haven’t been doing as well as we have historically.
So those are the kinds of big structural shifts that we’re going to have to
make. We’re not going to be able to make them all overnight but one of the
things that I’m pleased about is given the history of financial crisis we have
actually managed this and rebounded much more quickly than I think anybody
anticipated and we’re in a strong position with strong growth rates to move in
a very positive direction but we have to tend to these long term problems.
KERRY O’BRIEN:AT THE SAME TIME AS THESE FAMILIES ARE STRUGGLING, THE WALL
STREET SYNDROME LIVES ON, IF I COULD PUT IT THAT WAY – BANKERS BACK FEEDING AT
THE TROUGH WHILE MUCH OF THE REST OF AMERICA PAYS. DO YOU FEEL STRONG ENOUGH –
IN A STRONG ENOUGH POSITION, A STRONG ENOUGH PLACE, DO YOU HAVE NOW THAT YOU
HAVE THE MOMENTUM BACK – TO WITHSTAND THE POWER OF THE WALL STREET LOBBY AND
SERIOUSLY REGULATE THE FINANCIAL SYSTEM THE WAY YOU WANT TO. I KNOW WHAT YOUR
PLANS ARE BUT THAT LOBBY IS A VERY POWERFUL VERY RESISTENT LOBBY
PRESIDENT OBAMA: I think we’re going to get this done, and the reason is
because the American people understand that what happened in 2008 cannot be
repeated and so lobbies operate well under the cover of darkness when you have
the disinfectant of sunlight on the process and what it is that we’re trying
to push for, then I think we’re going to get a very strong financial
regulatory reform bill and as part of the G20 we’ll be coordinating with
Australia and other countries to make sure that these reforms are not just
taking place on Wall Street but they’re taking place in London, they’re taking
place in Hong Kong, all across, all around the world we’ve got to recognise
that capitalism is absolutely the best system for producing wealth but there’s
got to be a regulatory framework put in place to make sure that excessive
risks don’t end up bringing the entire system down.
KERRY O’BRIEN: SO WHY ARE YOU SO CONFIDENT THAT YOU WILL BE ABLE TO GET YOUR
REGULATORY SYSTEM THROUGH CONGRESS?
PRESIDENT OBAMA: I’m always confident.
KERRY O’BRIEN: WELL IT WORKED ON HEALTH EVENTUALLY.
PRESIDENT OBAMA: Yes.
KERRY O’BRIEN:ON YOUR PATH TO THE WHITE HOUSE, YOU INSPIRED GREAT HOPE AROUND
THE WORLD, NOT JUST IN AMERICA BUT AROUND MUCH OF THE REST OF THE WORLD. HOW
WILL YOU MEASURE THE WORTH OF YOUR PRESIDENCY?
PRESIDENT OBAMA: You know if looking back on my Presidency whether it’s one
term or two, I can say that I was able to wind down the war in Iraq
successfully, I was able to stabilise Afghanistan in a way that keeps the
American people safe. That we were able to create an economy that works for
all Americans and not just some Americans and that we’ve provided a little
more security with respect to having a healthcare system that works. You know
I think those would be goals that I came into office espousing and being able
to deliver on my promises I think is the best thing that a politician can do.
KERRY O’BRIEN: AND LAST QUESTION, WHAT WILL IT MEAN TO YOU, WHAT DOES IT MEAN
TO YOU TO BE SEEN AS A TRANSFORMATIONAL PRESIDENT?
PRESIDENT OBAMA: You know I don’t tend to think of myself in those terms. What
I tend to think about is the job in front of me, what I need to do today,
tomorrow, the next day. I assume that I’ll have a lot of leisurely time after
the Presidency to look back and see what kind of impact I had.
KERRY O’BRIEN: BARACK OBAMA, THANKS YOU VERY MUCH FOR TAKING THIS OPPORTUNITY
TO TALK WITH US.
PRESIDENT OBAMA:I enjoyed it, thank you very much.
朱翠 该用户已被删除
14楼 大 中 小 发表于 2010-5-19 18:57 只看该作者
WJ这个ID
转的文章
一向断章取义
亏有人还信
未来他老爸
15楼 大 中 小 发表于 2010-5-19 20:29 只看该作者
WJ87
无产阶级煽动家
eat.eat
真摇滚，真愤青，真大气魄
16楼 大 中 小 发表于 2010-5-19 21:50 只看该作者
蒸汽机刚发明时就有人预言地球上的煤就快烧没了
weke
挪威.奥斯陆
17楼 大 中 小 发表于 2010-5-19 22:40 只看该作者
就我自己所经历和认识的看来，在上层权利和利益的分配与争夺中，这已经是一个丧失了信誉和道德底线的国家。
我朝共产
内心抗争的屁民一个——“为什么要给畜牲自由？它们一代代的命运就是套上枷锁，接受鞭挞。” @huicn
18楼 大 中 小 发表于 2010-5-19 22:50 只看该作者
笑而不语。。。
河殇
抱歉，根据相关法律法规和政策，本人目前只能低调，不能狂妄。推特@lxkrock
19楼 大 中 小 发表于 2010-5-20 00:04 只看该作者
看了视频评论 真是对 国民的智商深感忧虑
写实
自由，就是宽容异端的思想言论
20楼 大 中 小 发表于 2010-5-20 00:16 只看该作者
引用:
原帖由 朱翠 于 2010-5-19 18:57 发表
WJ这个ID
转的文章
一向断章取义
亏有人还信
怎么愤，怎么能煽动仇外，就怎么忽悠，呵呵
须佐之男
21楼 大 中 小 发表于 2010-5-20 00:28 只看该作者
如果这个说法是对的，那意思就是说，这个世界的贫穷，是因为有像欧美这种高质量的生活造成的？
花想容
依据用户管理细则，账号永久停用。
22楼 大 中 小 发表于 2010-5-20 08:19 只看该作者
翻译故意误导，看原文不关生活质量什么事，只是对碳排放就事论事而已
[ 本帖最后由 花想容 于 2010-5-20 08:24 编辑 ]
自由中国
宪章签署者。建立公民意识，推进公民社会。未来的自由中国在民间!~Twitter @jht81
23楼 大 中 小 发表于 2010-5-20 08:45 只看该作者
何亚福:地球资源用完了怎么办?
何亚福:地球资源用完了怎么办?
何亚福
甲：地球的自然资源是有限的，如果人口不断增长，自然资源总有用完的时候。所以必须实行计划生育来控制人口的增长!
乙：是的, 自然资源是有限的, 人类只有一个地球, 目前, 人类也没有能力移民到其它星球. 不过, 如果你说实行计划生育的理由是“自然资源是有限的”,
那么这种理由是不能成立的! 这是因为: 第一, 即使中国实行计划生育, 也只能减少中国的人口,
其他国家是不会因为“自然资源是有限的”而减少本国人口的,他们是不会响应你“要减少大家一起来减少”的号召的。 第二, 即使全世界只剩下一亿人,
地球资源也总有用完的时候, 那时候怎么办? 总不成大家都自杀了吧?
甲：那你说自然资源用完了之后怎么办?
乙：一般来说, 面对生存压力, 不同的民族、不同的国家会作出不同的选择. 比方说, 有甲、乙两个国家, 他们的粮食生产都不足以养活本国人口. 于是,
甲国采取的措施是: 实行计划生育以减少本国人口; 乙国采取的措施是: 想方设法提高粮食产量, 并大力发展国民经济. 从这个例子中我们看到, 面对生存压力,
甲国选择了向内：企图改造自身来适应环境，结果只能走上退化的道路; 而乙国选择了向外：改造生存环境以适应自己的民族, 结果越来越富裕。
甲：我知道粮食产量可以提高, 可是像石油这些能源属于不可再生资源, 地球上的石油只会越用越少, 而且没办法生产出来, 所以必须节约使用!
乙：我再举甲、乙两个国家为例子: 当地球上的石油差不多用完的时候, 甲国通过一项法律, 禁止私人拥有小轿车, 以节省汽油;
乙国则千方百计研究能代替汽油的新能源, 结果研制出一种使用新能源的汽车, 并行销全世界。
甲：你的意思是说，当地球上一种资源快用完的时候, 应该寻找另一种替代资源?
乙：是的, 地球上任何一种资源都是有限的, 但是, 任何一种资源也都有其替代的资源. 所以, 我们根本不必担忧某种资源用完了怎么办? 而且,
究竟什么是资源？石油在地球上已经存在上百万年了，可真正大规模开发利用才100多年，200年前的人类会认为石油是资源吗？当然不会，所以说资源是科学技术进步的结果。当人不会使用煤的时候，煤只不过是黑石头；当人们不会使用汽油的时候，石油常年沉睡在地下。人类之所以数量越来越多,
人均自然资源越来越少, 生活反而越来越富裕, 就是不断战胜生存压力的结果, 而不是实行计划生育的结果。
甲：但你怎么能肯定，当一种资源用完之后，人类一定能找到替代资源？如果人类找不到替代资源怎么办？所以，在百分之百地肯定人类能找到新的替代资源之后，才能放宽计划生育政策。
乙：按照你的逻辑，你的母亲在生你之前，也要这样说：“我怎么能肯定，你长大之后一定能找到工作？如果你找不到工作怎么办？所以，在百分之百地肯定你能找到工作之后，才能把你生下来。”你的母亲不是先知，不可能在生你之前就知道你将来的职业具体是哪一种，但她知道，只要把你抚养大，并使你受到良好的教育，你自然能够找到工作。同样，我也不是先知，我不知道将来新的替代资源具体是哪一种，但我知道，人类总是在不断进步的。只要科学技术在进步，自然资源永远也不会枯竭。
甲：现在中国的许多种人均自然资源都低于世界平均水平, 例如, 我国人均水资源只有2200立方米,
仅相当于世界人均水资源的1/4。所以只有把中国的人口降下来, 才能提高人均自然资源的拥有量。
乙：为什么一定要提高人均自然资源的拥有量? 一个国家的人均自然资源丰富不等于这个国家富裕.
以人均水资源而言，以色列是600万人，它的土地60%是干旱和半干旱地区，人均水资源才270立方米。中国人均水资源是2200立方米，相当于以色列的8倍,
但中国的人均收入远远不及以色列。以色列作为世界上最缺水的国家，他并不实行计划生育以减少以色列的人口，相反，他发展出世界上最节水的灌溉技术。以色列人使用水已经上升到了一种水文明,
由漫灌到渠灌，由渠灌到中灌，由中灌到滴灌。以色列用水的文明已经达到了滴灌的境界。
甲：但是中国西部的环境很恶劣, 不控制人口增长肯定是不行的.
乙：环境是可以改变的。以色列建国之初,
其农业生产的条件也是十分恶劣的，发展农业生产的两大基本要素土地和水都不具备。而以色列人仅用短短的几十年时间，就在大部分是荒漠，水资源十分匮乏的土地上奇迹般地创造了一片片绿洲，无不令世人叹服。沙漠大棚温室、滴灌技术、沙漠菜田等奇迹的出现，都在说明和诠释着这样一个浅显的道理，即一切人类文明成果的出现都是人们辛勤努力和聪明智慧的结晶。如果以色列人也像某些中国人那样总是埋怨环境恶劣而不思进取,
以色列早就亡国了。
甲：人类不能进行光合作用, 必须消耗其它动物或植物才能生存。一个人从出生到死亡, 都是消费者。
乙：是的, 人类不能进行光合作用, 但其它动物也不能进行光合作用, 也必须消耗其它动物或植物才能生存. 你只看到人作为消费者的一面,
却看不到人作为创造者的一面. 一个人的一生中, 所创造的价值完全可以大于他(或她)所消费的价值. 也就是说,
人一生中所创造的价值减去消费的价值是正数而不是负数, 否则人类社会就不会越来越进步了。现在有些城市出台的这项规定是非常荒唐的: 不允许城市居民生第二胎,
却允许城市居民养宠物(例如大狼狗). 养一个宠物的花费往往比养一个小孩的花费更大, 而且宠物不能创造出有益于人类的价值。
自由中国
宪章签署者。建立公民意识，推进公民社会。未来的自由中国在民间!~Twitter @jht81
24楼 大 中 小 发表于 2010-5-20 08:46 只看该作者
何亚福:中国人不是废物！
何亚福:中国人不是废物！
-—关于人口与计划生育的对话
何亚福
甲：实行计划生育以来，中国少生了3亿人，节省了7万亿元抚养费。平均来说，少生一个人节省了2万多元的抚养费。
乙：按照这个逻辑，如果你的父母对你说：“当初如果不生你，我们就节省2万多元的抚养费了。”你会有什么感觉？难道少生的那3亿人都是废物？他们长大之后不会创造出大于他们抚养费的价值？抚养孩子的收益大于花费，换句话说，人的价值是正数而不是负数，这是一个常识，如果你还没有这个常识，说明你认为人类社会不是进步而是倒退的。
甲：我看到新闻报道说，中国少生了3亿人，为世界人民作出了贡献。
乙：除了中华民族以外，世界上没有哪一个民族认为减少本民族的人口是对世界人民作贡献的！如果认为中国人是废物，那么减少中国人口当然是为世界作贡献，因为世界上减少了废物；如果认为中国人是有价值的，那么减少中国人口就是世界的损失了！中国的新闻媒体宣传说，中国少生了3亿人是为世界人民作出了贡献。然而，世界人民并不会为此而感激中国人，只有那些一直嫌中国人多的种族主义者，才会为大量减少中国人口而喝彩!
甲：你谈到“种族主义者”，英国曼联前主帅阿特金森说过：“我难以理解，为什么中国会有人口问题？他们本来有最好的避孕方法—-中国女人是世界上最丑的。”
这使我很气愤！
乙：既然一个民族自己正在努力地使用行政手段减少本民族的人口，那么，还有谁不认为这个民族不应该减少？既然一个民族自己认为自己的存在是消耗世界资源，认为减少自己是对世界作出贡献，那么还有谁会不这样认为？既然一个民族自己认为本民族人口太多了，应该大量减少人口，那么还有谁不认为“他们本来有最好的避孕方法”？正应了这句话：“自尊者人必尊之，自贱者人必贱之。”
甲：但是如果取消计划生育，谁来养活多生出来的人口？他们都到你家吃饭行不行?
乙：多生出来的人口难道全部是残疾人? 他们都失去了劳动能力?
即使是残疾人，也并不一定全部都靠别人养活的。提出这个问题的人是在假定：人都是只会消费价值而不会创造价值的废物！我不知道提出这个问题的人本身是不是一个寄生虫！
甲：我问你：一个国家养活一亿人容易还是养活十亿人容易? 当然是养活一亿人更容易吧!
乙：你怎么不问：一个国家养活一百万人容易还是养活十亿人容易？究竟是国家养活人民还是人民养活国家？世界上有许多国家，人口只有几百万甚至几十万，但这些国家却很贫穷；世界上也有许多国家，人口有几千万甚至上亿，但这些国家却很富裕。提出这个问题的人与上面这位“寄生虫”有着同样的思维模式。
甲：但是中国有13亿人口，生存压力太大了。
乙：生存压力的大小，主要不取决于人口的多少。世界上人口密度大的国家，生活水平也并不一定比人口密度小的国家差。中国并不是生存压力最大的国家，人口密度比中国大、人均自然资源比中国少的国家有几十个，但他们都没有通过减少人口来解决生存压力问题。你如果嫌人多，那你愿意搬到荒无人烟的地方去住吗？企图通过减少人口来提高人均自然资源拥有量进而变得富裕起来，其实是一种极为短视的懒汉思想！
甲：计划生育是为了使中国人过得更好，牺牲的是我们这一代人，幸福的是后人。
乙：与你设想的正好相反，计划生育可以让现在的这一代人过上相对好一点的日子（因为节省了抚养后代的费用），但是留给后代的是老龄化、性别比失衡、社会需求不足、国家竞争力下降等等恶果。如果真的为后代着想，就不要把一个老龄化社会的烂摊子留给后代！计划生育宣传说“为后代着想”，而实际上，拒绝承担养育责任、贪图现在的享受才是真正的不为后代着想！
甲：现在有一些人说：“中国的各种问题，归根结底都是人口太多的问题。”
乙：有些人把什么罪过都归咎于“人口太多”，人口多、人均收入低和人均资源少曾经为我国的国民经济和社会生活提供过太多的借口，当了太长时间的替罪羊，但是资源并不是单一的矿产、土地等等，人口本身就是一种资源，没了人你能干成什么事情？事实上，中国成为世界制造业中心，不是靠技术、靠资金而是靠廉价劳动人口支撑起来的，对于当代中国来说，人口多是谁也无法否认的优势。中国的教育经费占GDP的比例不及非洲穷国乌干达，这样，一方面由于国家政策的原因，使大量的人力资源白白变成了垃圾；另一方面政丨府又反过来告诉我们，中国的一切问题，就是你们这些人太多造成的，所以中国必须大量减少人口才行！
甲：这么说，所谓“人口太多”，其实是一种借口？
乙：是的，所谓“人口太多”其实是政策失误、吏治腐败和制度缺陷的挡箭牌和遮羞布。我们要警惕的是，对体制改革和社会进步的无所作为，而对人口的歇斯底里。在一些人眼里，人口要为腐败作出牺牲，人口要为扭曲的体制作出牺牲，因为一切罪在人口。实际上，所谓的生存压力问题，哪怕你腐败少那么一点，体制理顺那么一点，都将极大减轻社会和个人的生存压力。人类社会的进步都是缘于改革体制与科技发展，而非源于自我阉割。只要有顺畅的体制与不断进步的科技，我们能交给子孙后代一个美丽的河山和一个富裕的社会，而无需剥夺他们的兄弟姐妹。
xykz
25楼 大 中 小 发表于 2010-5-20 11:19 只看该作者
这个文小组转过吧？
https://1984bbs.com/viewthread.p … =%B0%C2%B0%CD%C2%ED
根本就是误导