Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Humanities/2006 November 26

Welcome to the Wikipedia Humanities Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

November 26

New York, New York

For Spring Break, I am planning to go to The Big Apple, and I don't really know what else to do other than the normal places tourists go (e.g. Ststue of Libety, Ground Zero). Maybe a native inhabitant or one who has visited previously can tell me some places on the path less traveled. schyler 03:03, 26 November 2006 (UTC) P.S. I AM planning on going to see some plays/musicals definately including Phantom of the Opera and Les Miserables (is it even still running?). Maybe some more sugestions I could go see. schyler 03:06, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Spring with the best band in the world, the NY Philharmonic: In March, Davis with Uchida and Lapu in Mozart; in April, Maazel with Fischer in Brahms, or with Mutter in Berg Wolfgangus 05:19, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

What are you interested in? There are tons of museums, at least one would interest you. Did you look at the article on New York City? Tourism in New York City? Don't overlook the outer boroughs, there are lots of things to do outside of Manhattan. Art galleries, shopping,the new planetarium, eating - you can eat almost any kind of food that exists in the world - bookstores, opera, dance, nightclubs, off-Broadway shows, visiting different neighborhoods, architecture, Central Park. Give more info about what you like to do, see, eat, and how long you will be here. -THB 06:36, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

You should go on a food tour. My brother went to Columbia, and every time I visited, we went around the five boroughs, eating 10 or more mini-meals a day. (It's great fun, if you have any doubts.) It takes a lot of research and perseverance to find the good places though. If this sounds appealing, I can make some suggestions, though it's been a while. Just ask. I'd have to find my list to respond, so I'll only look for it if you're interested. Sashafklein 07:01, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

I'd also suggest visiting areas of the city when there are markets going on. On a Saturday morning, you should check out the Union Square Market or, if you're willing to go out of Manhattan (which you really should), then check out the market by Prospect Park, Brooklyn. Either way, try some of the ____ Gate (blanking on the name) cheese. It's a beautiful park. Olmstead, who designed Central Park, amoung many other pretty places, said Prospect was his favorite park. Also, the Brooklyn Museum of Art is a cool building (somewhat near the park) which frequently has good shows. Brooklyn's a cool place (at least some parts.) At night, you might want to check out some of Brooklyn's cooler districts, like DUMBO or Williamsburg, Brooklyn, or take a walk through the long hasidic neighborhoods in Brooklyn (a good experience to have.) I might check out one of the city's several botanical gardens, which are great. I'd head into Queens to see P.S. 1 Contemporary Art Center if you're into modern art. At night, I'd also suggest seeing some live music (jazz!) shows (pick up a Village Voice or Time Out for listings) or even movies - because there are a lot of great indie flicks that are hard to find outside of NYC. If you have any particular food recommendation requests, feel free to ask those. Tourbooks aren't usually all that good when it comes to food, and Zagat is rarely better. I'm not quite sure how I'd rate myself as a source, but... Sashafklein 07:13, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

I completely forgot about the NY Philharmonic. My absolute favorite musician is in that group. About the food, that sounds interesting, the 10 "mini-meals." I was wanting to try some Greek food, maybe some different Asian foods (like other than fried rice and mongolian beef), and probably some Indian food. Maybe a list of some places with those foods would be good, plus some of your personal suggestions. schyler 07:36, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Since we're getting some details on Brooklyn, throw in a stroll through the Park Slope neighborhood next to Prospect Park. It's the largest historic district in the city. Then hail a cab on Seventh Avenue or Flatbush and have a meal at Junior's Restaurant. Ever since Leo's Diner on East 86th Street closed Junior's has become the epicenter of the cheesecake universe: one bite will turn your arteries into cement. Walk across the Brooklyn Bridge from the Brooklyn side; the view is astounding. Back in Manhattan, visit some of the downtown art galleries and see what's playing at the jazz clubs. there's no harbor tour that's a better bargain than a trip on the Staten Island Ferry. Take it at night. Try Dim Sum on a weekend morning in Chinatown - you'll know you're in the right place if you're seated at a table with five people you never met, can't name or pronounce what you're eating, and they seem to be joking in Mandarin about how you'd react if you knew what the dish really is. Basically you'll never see enough of New York City if you live there for ten years, so absorb as much of it as you can in the week that you have. The things that capture your heart will probably be quirky. There's a single rosary bead downstairs at The Cloisters that's hundreds of years old and carved in near-microscopic detail: I consider it worth the whole journey to Fort Tryon Park. Durova^Charge! 19:29, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

As opposed to New York, ... ? DirkvdM 19:36, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

As opposed to New York State. Going to New York could just as well be a trip to Albany or Buffalo as to New York City. But Schyler, if, as you advertise on your user page, you despise gay people, I would suggest you and everyone else would be happier if you just stay home. You should certainly avoid any of the cultural centers in the City, as you will no doubt be exposed to that which you hate. - Outerlimits 20:04, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

I've said it before, and I'll say it again: I DO NOT despise gay people, I simply think that having a butt sex is gross. I actually think gay people are nice. I would however, try to stay a good distance away from one of the parades. schyler 22:27, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Hmmm. You don't despise gay people, but you label "butt sex" as gay, and advertise your hatred on your home page. Certainly no issues there. I might have told you where to get the best fries in New York, absolutely orgasmic confit du canard, and perfect nan and tandoori... but...I think not. - Outerlimits 23:26, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Sorry for the delay. I've been busy all day. I don't really know any good Greek food in NY! (I'm more than a bit disappointed in myself.) If you're into trying many tastes in one day, I might suggest some places where you could get mini meals. First, I'd head over to West 4th (187th West 4th, to be exact) one morning around 9ish (i think) to get good croissant at Patisserie Claude, which is really quite difficult to find, because the street bends in unexpected places. You'd then be somewhat near one of my favorite districts in the city. Near a lot of nice jazz etc places you could go to later. There is also a great cheese place somewhat nearby - Murray's Cheese Shop - and a pretty good gelateria right next door to that - Cones. Nearby, if you just want to check it out, is a great old butcher shop, Ottomanelli and Sons While in NY, you've got to have a pastrami on rye (or something else, but why?) in a good deli. I'd suggest Stage Deli or Carnegie Deli. Near stage is the great smoked fish shop Russ and Daughters, where you can keep asking for samples until you feel you have to buy something or are stared out the door by one of the daughters. You might want to try some new-dill or other pickles at Guss' Pickles (going downhill, the last time I tried) or The Pickle Guys. Right near Guss' is, in my opinion, the best ice cream in New York by a long shot, Il Laboratorio de Gelato. They have absolutely mind-blowing ice creams in fairly unique flavors (divine Black Sesame, great Honey Lavender, killer Yellow Plum) that vary frequently.

If it's a nice day, I'd definitely go with a botanical garden, and I might head up into the Bronx to see [Wave Hill (New York)| Wave Hill], a great public garden. While you're in the Bronx, I'd visit Crescent Street, which, because it's been cut off of most public transportation, still looks like an old mafia neighborhood (brings up memories of the flower-stabbing flashback in Godfather.) Near there is the best Italian restaurant ever, Robertos, which has recently relocated a block or so, so make sure you've got the right address. Also in the Bronx is the Tats Cru Graffiti Hall of Fame, which is pretty cool.

Other than that, I have trouble thinking up much, because I can't find my complete list. If you want great sushi, I'd suggest Poke, which used to be tiny but got a good review and is now so popular with the ubiquitous crowd of hipsters that pervade the city that it has at least tripled in size, which means it's still great, still pretty small, but no longer so secret or VIP. It's BYO. I would not do Dim Sum in New York. I've been to many of the highly-touted places and was consistently underwhelmed. Perhaps I'm wrong, there, though. Good Chinese at Ping's in Chinatown (try the stirfried dried squid - wow), as well at Wu Liang Ye somewhat near Moma (great raw razor clams with scallion sauce, yummy bacon with capiscum, if you're into chillies cooked in bacon grease.) I'm sure there are better places, though. Good Thai at Sripraphai, as well, though you'd have to find some other reason to go to Queens.

Also, Pizza. Try Gramaldi's for a good slice in DUMBO and Una Pizza Neapolitana for a great authentic, simple margherita style pizza.

Although Outerlimits might have a better suggestion, I found the rosemary naan at Tabla (a mid-upper range, pretty good Indian restaurant - especially, I feel, the more authentic Bread Bar - run by the Union Square Cafe guy) to be pretty good. I'm sure I can't compete when it comes to fries. I'd also suggest that when you're in NY you search out a really good cup of coffee. It'll be hard to find anything quite as good as you can get there anywhere else in the US (possible, but hard.)

If you want more food suggestions, I'd suggest looking at The Slow Food Guide to New York City which has a better batting average than most tour books, in my opinion.

And I feel compelled to wonder out loud why the hell (other than to have "69!!! Userboxes") you find it necessary, prudent, or nice to note on your userpage that you find "homosexuality immoral and/or just plain gross." What's the point?

Hope that was helpful and not under/overwhelming. Sashafklein 00:30, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Oh, and Outerlimits, now you've made me feel deprived of the best fries in New York, absolutely orgasmic confit du canard, and perfect nan and tandoori. Oh well. It was an important comment to make. Regardless of whether or not you reconsider your offensive stance on the subject, schyler, you've got to think of what type of statement you're making (and why) by including that information on your userpage. Sashafklein 00:45, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Make reservations at Nirvana (Central Park South) at dusk for Indian Cuisine. Be sure to ask for a window seat. And don't forget the Bronx Zoo, American Museum of Natural History, the Metropolitan Museum of Art, and Yankee Stadium. B00P 05:22, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Germania flora and fauna around 12BC

I am seeking details related to the flora and fauna of Germania around the time of 12BC. Besides a few references to plants and animals in the works of Caesar and Tacitus, I am really battling to find this information. Can anyone help?

I would imagine very much as it is today, though more thickly forested. See if you can get any further clues in Germania and the Battle of the Teutoberg Forest. Sources you might look at, besides those you have mentioned, are Dio Cassius, Strabo, Pliny the Elder, Diodorus Siculus, Posidonius and Aufidius Bassus, the most relevant Classical historians and geographers. Good luck. Clio the Muse 08:27, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Several plants, including trees, that are quite common now were brought in by the Romans or later. Fully established now, strictly speaking they are introduced species, although only considered so by purists. I've forgotten what the examples were I heard about. For German lists of some later introduced flora and fauna that you would not have found in 12BC, see de:Neophyt and de:Neozoen.  --Lambiam^Talk 12:01, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

actually, I think you should take a look at the area that is now-called holland. and to be more specific the eastern regions of it. because I "know" that the flora in holland is welldocumented in those times (I've read several schoolbooks on it. though the part of the fauna is rather interesting and as such I fail to recall any real information about it. On a personal note; I think(this is more or less guessing by logics and the theory illogica) Germania could be divided into several regions. going from a sea-climate to a land-climate to a tundra-climate. also on a side note: do you know how big Germania was? you have been looking at the utmost southwest points of Germania. so If you want that please specify so Graendal 06:30, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Hello, Graendal. If you click on the Germania link above you will see that it includes what is now Holland, and much more besides. Clio the Muse 09:35, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Communism vs Capitalism

Under Communism is shoplifting viewed as an indication that the social welfare system has been or is remiss in its duty to adequately provide for its citizens or as a crime and threat to society? 71.100.6.152 10:39, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Under true communism, I think shoplifting should be impossible, since everything's collectively owned...(?) 惑乱 分からん 10:46, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

This is not part of any official communist doctrine. You might perhaps be able to find individuals who consider themselves communists and who are willing to defend this thesis.  --Lambiam^Talk 11:04, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Was that directed to me? Sorry, then... 惑乱 分からん 11:54, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

I follow the rule that, when reacting to contributions having indentation level L, I put my reaction at level L+1, or in special cases (e.g. an insert not respecting chronological order if there is already an L+1 reaction) at L+2. Anyway, the formulation "official communist doctrine" was tongue-in-cheek anyway; where is the Pope of communism who will rule ex cathedra on matters of doctrine?  --Lambiam^Talk 14:55, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

I once read some interviews with shop-detectives who claimed that all sorts of people have a go at shoplifting, not just those who can't afford it. There's a "everybody's doing it, so why won't I try"feeling about it. (The money the shops lose because of theft simply push prices up for honest customers.)Evilbu 12:22, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

It might be seen as an untolerable expression of individuality on the shared capital since the state is assumed to have the role as an organised redistributor of riches. Please note that communism can also be considered a form of capitalist system (although there's a lot of arguing about that and it depends on the interpretation of the concept of capitalism). It is easier to oppose a communist vs a liberal system. Keria 13:27, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

"might be seen as an untolerable expression of individuality on the shared capital..." excellent response and general the answer I agree with in logical justification terms. 71.100.6.152 16:52, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

... intolerable ...  : p - Keria 17:19, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

In communism there is no possession (not even by the state, because there is no state either), so by definition no theft. Actually, for communism to work, everyone has to be ultra nice to each other, so the thought of theft would not enter anyone's mind. Or were you thinking of State Socialism? DirkvdM 19:52, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

As stated below I am refering to the practical real..." 71.100.6.152 20:43, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

I wouldn't say there is NO possession under Communism. Obviously, even under Communism, no one (at least not in the name of collective ownership) is going to try to take the shoes you wear everyday, because they belong to you. Rather, collective ownership refers to the means of production, among other things. And yes, to be hyper-techincal the question was probably referring to state socialism, but as Marx himself called the party charged with fomenting the Revolution "Communist" I think we should let it go...GreatManTheory 20:53, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

There is nothing to "let go" here. My question seeks to clarify and understand only one difference between the fundamentals which the major world wide economies operate. I need to know the difference in how a shoplifter is treated in a typical Communist Country versus how one is treated in a Capitalist country. If exposure of the resulting fundamental difference is too much for anyone to bare please refrain from comment. 71.100.6.152 22:52, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

My "let go" comment was not an attempt to ridicule your question, instead it was made to draw attention to DirkvdM's feigned misunderstanding of your question. To answer, I am not entirely sure, although as mentioned by others above it is hard to describe a "typical" Communist state. Are you interested only in "full fledged" Communist states such as the former USSR, or does your question include the democratic socialism worked into many of the European countries? Likewise, it is hard to label a capitalist country as "typical" because each state has its own penal code which may or may not be similar to others, regardless of economic system. I would assume that most capitalist states would seek to encourage economic activity, and that this aim would be reflected in their penal codes (thus including punishments for shoplifting). GreatManTheory 23:31, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

I assume that in a purely utilitarian Communist or socialist state that there would be no opportunity for shoplifting, i.e., everything would be sold through a window. This works by default at many fast food restaurants and retailers that have showrooms only with all showroom merchandice tethered and all distributed merchandice in the backroom. Bottom line is whether shoplifters are regarded differently for instance as a threat to a system of retail profit in terms of profit reduction and loss of sales tax revenue in a capitalist system versus showing an intolerable expression of individuality on the shared capital in a communist or socialist system. For this purpose I would define the form of state permitted economic retail activity to be based upon a breakeven method or perhaps a "sales tax" of 50% or greater. 71.100.6.152 00:17, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

The simple answer to your question, the context in which you have placed it, and as I understand it, is yes, shoplifting is considered as a crime in Socialist societies. Indeed, penalties for those who are caught are, in general, that much more severe than in 'capitalist' countries, usually because the economies are more marginally balanced, and because it would be considered as a form of anti-social behaviour. For questions to be raised about the failure of social welfare, you really would be entering into the realm of the abstract and the ideal. Clio the Muse 00:29, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Since even Paris Hilton shoplifts without need of monetary gain I suppose shoplifting in a socialist outlet can not be used as an accurate barometer of fiscal service in a socialist economy as well. 71.100.6.152 01:06, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure what 'marginally balanced' means, but ideally, in a socialist state everyone has enough to not need to steal. Which would make it an extra serious crime.

Anbout the technicalities, GreatManTheory, the party is communist because it strives for commnunism. That doesn't mean that is achieved already (and indeed it never will, but don't tell them :) ). In the meanwhile, people are prepared for communism through state socialism, whcich is employed in a transitional state called a socialist state. DirkvdM 06:44, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Was that your point about 'marginally balanced', Dirk? I'm not really talking about ideals but systems actually in operation. Consumer goods in Cuba, to take but one obvious example, are at a premium in an economy tottering on the edge of collapse; an economy, in other words, that might be described as marginally balanced. Clio the Muse 07:01, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Cuba isn't a rich country, but it's economy is hardly on the edge of collapse. Actually, I believe it's growing fast after first it opened up to tourism and then it got help from Venezuela. DirkvdM 04:38, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Try to get hold of some facts and figures. Do you know what ordinary Cubans earn from the tourist industry? Do you know what ordinary Cubans earn in general? Do you know what they get in food rations? Did you even know that they were on rations? Have you been inside a Cuban home? Have you come in contact with the huge levels of official bribery and corruption? I rather imagine the answer to all of these is no, you do not. Clio the Muse 09:37, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Shoplifting can only be possible where there is private property, and where laws are but a guarantee of the security of the right of the people to own private property. In Communism where there is no private property, shoplifting is impossible. However, we are talking here of the future Communist society whose characteristics we cannot as of now fully describe as we are limited by the material conditions informing our thoughts (ideology). It is certain though, that shoplifting or any kind of stealing is impossible in Communism. You own the world, you own yourself in Communism, therefore, there is nothing to steal. Moonwalkerwiz 00:38, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

The point has already been made that even in the most ardent Communist society (or family unit) the individual must at some point enjoy right of use and possession of say a breath of air or a drink of water or a bite of food above others. Otherwise you could be deprived of these possessions by anyone without consequence. Besides even under pure Capitalism no one owns the world and not even their own self entirely. 71.100.6.152 02:36, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

71.100.6.152, you are speaking under the influence of ideology. Like what I've said, we cannot yet fully describe the future Communist society because of the material limitations informing our thoughts. We only know based from the analysis of Marx that the future society is a social one, not individualistic. What do you mean "deprived of these possessions by anyone without consequence"? It doesn't make any sense. How can you be deprived of something when you and society own that "something"? If your life, if your essence is in the social, if you become a social being, if you are a species-being, how could you even think of stealing? Secondly, you are redundant to say "deprived of possessions." There are no other possessions in the future Communist society (the negation of the negation) other than the possession of the society. No one deprives anyone, no one steals from anyone in the future Communist society because there are no private property. Even the air is social, even food, water, etc. There is no reason - no material basis - for stealing or depriving someone of something. That's why I said you own the world, because the world is not alien to you anymore - it doesn't enslave you or exploit you in any manner. You are part of it. You are united with the social, with the world, with your essence. Clear your head 71.100.6.152, and read more Marx. Moonwalkerwiz 06:08, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Clio, the answer is 'yes' to all your questions (four posts up) except for the bribery. Then again, I never give in to bribery and pretty much ignore the issue. And of course I know about the rationing. I can't imagine a guidebook not mentioning that. I've been inside loads of private homes (casas particulares) and in one I've seen ration coupons. They don't cover everything, but that didn't hurt the proprietors too much becuase they had a relatively good income from the tourist industry. Other Cubans have very low incomes, but then the prices are also ridiculously low by western standards.

Anyway, you said that the Cuban economy is on the edge of collapse, which is complete bull. Do you have any figures? Have you ever been to a really poor country, like most countries in Africa? I have. In comparison, Cubans are pretty well off. You won't see pizza and ice cream parlours all over the place in most African contries. Stop believing the hype. Do some travelling in stead. DirkvdM 20:25, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

'Gods and Generals' Piano Piece

Does anyone know what the piece being played by a daughter on the piano in scene 4 of the film Gods and Generals is called? I would imagine that it was written before 1870 (since the film is considered quite accurate; it's about the American Civil War) and I think it might be in the key of F major. Sounds like Beethoven but it could also be Dvorak or Mozart. I am guessing it is also in 3/4 time (or something similar with multiples of 3 in the bar). Any help would be great. RevenDS 10:49, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Here is an Ogg file of a bad recording I took of it being played: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Gods_and_Generals_Piano_Piece.ogg. RevenDS 11:08, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

It is from one of Beethoven's piano sonatas.  --Lambiam^Talk 11:32, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Specifically, it is the last section of the second movement of Piano Sonata No. 8 (Beethoven) (Opus 13), known as the Pathétique. --ColinFine 11:37, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks a lot, I've really been wanting to get ahold of that. On this sheet music, would it be possible for you to tell me which page/bar the sample bit of music I gave starts on approximately (or is it even on that?)? RevenDS 12:59, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

The Adagio cantabile [2nd movement] begins on page 9 and ends when the Rondo begins near the top of page 12. I could direct you down to the note if I can figure out how to run an .ogg file. That said, judging from ColinFine's comments, I'm inclined to think you're referring to the change in meter (from 4/4 to 3/4). If so, on page 10, you'll see a treble clef at the very end of the second measure; the sole note that follows (E flat) begins this section (hear those triplets) and it continues through to the end of the first measure on page 11.Wolfgangus 13:50, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

The clip you posted begins on the second bar of the third line of page 11, with the A natural in the middle - a little after where Wolfgangus suggested. --ColinFine 18:08, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Cryptography

Is cryptography in U.S. law still regarded as munition and thereby applied restrictions for export? --195.210.230.161 11:04, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

See Export of cryptography#Current status.  --Lambiam^Talk 11:45, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

was there a president blind in one eye

someone has asked me if I know who this president is is it a real question or are they pulling my leg?

Teddy Roosevelt suffered trauma in one eye that left him blind -- His Wikipedia entry attributes it to a boxing match at the White House. Such an incident would be impossible today, as our sitting president is already blind.Wolfgangus 17:11, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

...and also dumb. :-) StuRat 14:09, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Gordon Brown the Chancellor of the exchequer (in the uk) is also blind in one eye, and if political rumours are to be believed he is likely to succeed Tony Blair and become the UKs Prime Minister. ny156uk 18:02, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

So this means Popeye has a shot in 2008? Clarityfiend 23:02, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

My information is that Political Bioscience distinguishes between organic and functional Loss Of Sight Entrainment (LOSE). Organic LOSE is not that common, as can be seen from the paucity of examples given in the replies above. However, Functional Unilateral LOSE (FU-LOSE) is becoming required physiognomy for most senior politicians, used for rotating towards problematic corruptions, deceits and such nuisances. Functional Ultimate Widely-Established Ambi-LateraL LOSE (FUWEALL-LOSE) is at present not common, but specialists differ on how to diagnose the condition. Seejyb 23:50, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Since when was Brown still blind in one eye? I think this http://politics.guardian.co.uk/interviews/story/0,,1312621,00.html article may have been misinterpreted in the article on him.martianlostinspace 16:29, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Dude, he has a glass eye and everything. They don't just grow back. Morwen - Talk 08:37, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

breaking even versus making a profit

Is profit considered to be theft under Communism and other forms of socialism as opposed to a break even economy? Except for the absence of profit incentive (for some sellers) is it possible to provide for government sales taxes, management and labor costs and the material costs of an item? Would a break even economic system eliminate unfair profits and profit gouging or would sellers simply increase or add certain costs to make up the differnce and if so could this form of profit gouging be regulated? 71.100.6.152 17:25, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

In continuation of my above answer, in communism there is no money or economy, so none of this applies. DirkvdM 19:55, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

I am refering to the practical real rather than to the theoretical and esoteric ideal. 71.100.6.152 20:41, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Again, a case of misinterpretation of Marx. There are no chasms in Marxism. Even the base and superstructure relationship is a dialectical one, and everything in it is as real as this ugly desk where my computer sits on. Real? Theoretical? Esoteric? There can only be a material Communism, not yet consumated, but definitely evolving as we live our lives everyday. You can ask this question under Socialism, proletarian rule, Russian and Chinese socialist governments. But with Communism, perfected Communism, the negation of the negation - there is no way we can possibly describe how society and the economy will be arranged since we cannot see it from our material standpoint in history. We only know that the future society is social and if there is anything like money there, you can be sure it is not "the jealous god of Israel" that we now have. Profit is inherent in capitalism, too. It is abolished in Communism. Moonwalkerwiz 07:19, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Look at Communism and related links and see if that helps. You might also try Marxist economics. It is difficult to give an exact answer to your question since Communist, or Socialist systems, to use the slightly more accurate term, have varied widely in practice. However, 'profit' in the sense of surplus above costs would not, as a rule, be considered as 'theft', as you put it, but as a measure of relative efficiency. A 'break even' economy is a subsistence economy, and one, moreover, that is wasteful of limited resources. Strictly speaking, all 'profit' in the socialist systems that have existed, would simply fall into the arena of state taxation. I'm not really sure what you mean by 'unfair profits', as an operating surplus would be the only real measure of those branches of the economy that are fulfilling their targets in the most efficient way possible. Even in a Stalinist model the factory that fails to produce the required number of tractors and tanks hardly deserves further investment. Clio the Muse 00:07, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Shoplifters use deception by either concealing merchandise and walking slowly out the door or by not concealing merchandise and then bolting out the door. Their operation is based upon deceiving the seller before he can prevent the item from being stolen. The seller likewise uses deception by not revealing his costs to the buyer since his sale price might suggest he is trying to steal and prevent a sale. (Go into several retail stores and ask the seller how much he paid for an item he is selling. If you get any answer much less a truthful answer please let me know.) A sale price with undisclosed seller cost to the buyer is what makes profit derived in this manner theft. The problem is generally disregarded for luxuries but makes the case for socialism when the sale of necessities is involved. 71.100.6.152 00:39, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

I find a hard time labelling such profit a "theft." Each of us (in a capitalist country) goes into a store knowing full well that the owner paid less for it than we are about to pay. As such, there is no deception on the part of the store owner, whether or not he discloses his purchase price. I suppose you could object to the idea of whether a person in such a country is freely making the choice to buy a necessity. Arguments for both sides are freely available; whether you choose to accept them is another matter. GreatManTheory 01:54, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Since theft is a crime of opportunity forcing sellers to reveal their cost is an option not yet pursued. Sellers who consistently charge more than others reveal that they are either not as efficient in minimizing costs or belong in the category of thief. In absence of direct seller disclosure of cost consumers turn to price comparison. Since government costs are a matter of public record many cities and counties have turned to private corporations to provide all but police services in order to reduce the difference in cost and asking price (taxes) and hopefully remain above reproach. 71.100.6.152 03:05, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

If you don't mind me bugging you with yet more linguistic technicalities, Clio, this is not about socialist systems in general but about state socialism, which is absolute, as opposed to democratic socialism, of which almost every democratic country has some (even the US). DirkvdM 06:58, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

I never mind you bugging me, Dirk, on linguistic technicalities, or any other issue. But I'm not quite sure I understand the point that you are trying to make. I took the question to be about state socialism-or 'Communism', as the OP seems to prefer-and that is how my answer was pitched. Specifically, I attempted to outline the justification for the continuing existence of the 'profit motive' under such systems, and the practical function it might serve. On your wider point, every country has some elements of 'social policy' in its political makeup; though if this can really be described as 'democratic socialism', or socialism in any sense, is clearly open to question. Clio the Muse 08:55, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

The cost of a product is not just what the seller had to pay. To that one should add the cost of the establishment, the employees' pay, storage and interest loss, and what have you. One could try to distribute those costs over the products, but that is even theoretically difficult. In practise, the seller won't be able to tell you. He just adds a markup to the prices of the products, which he hopes will, over time, cover all those costs. If it doesn't, he made some error and goes out of business. If it does more than that, his gamble has payed off and the profit is his reward. Another scheme would be that the proprietor gets wages too and has neither the risk of losing money nor the prospect of gaining more than that as a result of the estimates he made. Any losses or excesses could then go through the state. And that would then be state socialism. There is no theft of the proprietor or state in either case, just different economic approaches. Of course, the former system invoves the risk of some people accumulating more money than would be reasonable, especially if they already had (considerably) more because of a previous economic 'caste' system, which is what happenened in Europe and which was considered large-scale theft by some, who then came up with communism and socialism as ways to resolve this. In the end, the socialist system was more realistic and has won, redistributing money and other facilities like education to the extent that there is more equal opportunity from birth. At least to some extent, more in some countries like in Scandinavia and less in others like the USA. DirkvdM 07:08, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Profit is not always profit. Sometimes it is excess revenue over expenses. -THB 12:34, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

By logical implication, profit is always profit, unless you're changing the meaning of the word in mid-sentence. Loomis 19:29, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

The way communism is not always communism? :) DirkvdM 04:42, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

I've heard of a restaurant in Paris I think where the proprietor has met the challenge of adjusting asking price to cost including not only the cost of material but of labor, utilities, etc. and has computer screens at each table so customers can watch as prices change to reflect such things as the mornings visit to the produce market and the purchase of a case of soap. An interesting perspective on money and profit can be derived by comparing blood with money. A certain minimum is absolutely critical but a great excess... well a resource best shared with others. The role of socialism, whatever its flavor, is to assure that no one is poor while the role of capitalism is to assure that some can be rich. What might solve the problem is a philosophy in which everyone is rich and no one is poor. But that was not my question. 71.100.6.152 19:48, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

American Rapper.

I read in the supplement that came with today's News of the World someting to this effect:

"Psssst! Which US rapper has a fondness for latin american boys but fears that his fans will shun him if they knew?"

Does anyone know which rapper is meant?

Yours CS

Ehhh, "The Gay Rapper"? ;) 惑乱 分からん 20:00, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Inappropriate. Gay <> pedophile. User:Zoe|(talk) 20:23, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Depends on your definition of "boy", I guess... =S 惑乱 分からん 22:37, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Perhaps you read that as a trivia question, but it sounds like one of those gossip questions. The writers (supposedly) know the correct answer, but can't...quite...tell you, for fear of legal action. The whole point is to provoke speculation. There may be a right answer, but your guess is as good as mine unless you're a Hollywood insider. --Grace 00:00, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Themeline of Nip Tuck

Can anyone clarify the underlying theme of Nip Tuck drama series? Does it centre around the stupidity of people trying to run behind plastic surgery to look good and gain more self confidence in the society or does it centre around the sex life of a sex addict (Plastic Surgeon) 18:59, 26 November 2006 (UTC)~~

Its basic theme is, the envelope is here, but it should be way the hell over there, so get pushing. Principally, its about the lives of the two main characters, Miami plastic surgeons Christian Troy, and Sean McNamara and their various mis-adventures. It obviously does touch on the people getting surgery done, (All episodes are named after that weeks main patient), their reasons for going under the knife, whether its simple vanity or something serious or sinister. Some patients are there just to brew controversy (A man infected with HIV wants surgery to hide the effects of wasting so he can date again). It also touches on how their line of work and interactions with their clients affects their personal lives, their families, etc. Its main calling though, is just to push the limits of what can be done on TV (At least here in the US, I'm sure it could be considered tame compared to programming elsewhere in the world), its constantly causing a stir with the PTC, and groups like it over the content and themes. I enjoyed the first and second seasons, but its been going downhill since then in my opinion. Cyraan 20:18, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Jewish Source Cited

What does Yer. 'Ab. Zarah iii. 42b, 43b refer to? 70.57.145.135 20:45, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Jerusalem Talmud, Avodah Zarah, chapter three. Skarioffszky 21:46, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Thank you very much! I can never find a list of abbreviations. Did you find one to figure that out, or did you just know? 70.57.145.135 00:30, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

I can't speak for Skarioffszky, but anyone familiar with the Talmud would have recognised the abbreviations used. --Dweller 17:55, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

In any case, try the JewishEncyclopedia list of abbreviations. Wareh 01:18, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

42b and 43b refer to the reverse of the folio numbered 42 and 43. Talmudic pages are numbered per sheet ("blatt"), with an a (aleph) or b (bet) designating which side is intended. --Dweller 17:54, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Collymobbits

What are 'the collymobbits'?

Google doesn't know either. Where did you come across this word? JackofOz 00:55, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

I think you can have the colly wobbles--Light current 01:54, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Sounds a bit like an example of Cockney rhyming slang to me, but it would have to be a pretty rare specimen to have zero google hits. Matt Deres 03:10, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Assuming you are mishearing/typing Collywobbles, to have the collywobbles can mean feeling nervous/anxious or it can mean a stomach ache or cramp. Personally I've only ever heard it used to mean anxiety, but the internet tells me it has other meanings. Skittle 19:49, 27 November 2006 (UTC)