Lonnie.... I have a bunch of derisive "stuff" to say about Fox and its cast of characters..... Do you really want to hear it?.....It gets to be pretty sophomoric, and I get tired of repeating myself in those terms...."namby -pamby" pales in comparison to the counter-right-wing material I could post, just from memory.... HAR...I'll let it slide, for now.... keep to the high-road...
On Wednesday, April 17, 2013 9:07:27 PM UTC-4, Lonnie Clay wrote: > > > http://www.foxnews.com/health/2013/02/12/woman-dies-from-drinking-10-liters-coke-day-coroner-says/ > > Should we ban coca cola because someone used it to drink herself to death? > I think not, and every namby-pamby liberal who talks about substance abuse > victims are just fighting evolution in action. > > > http://envirothink.wordpress.com/2010/12/16/epa-says-saccharin-no-longer-considered-a-carcinogen/ > > There's a prime example of the nanny state with its head up its A$$ being > forced to retract a decree. > > Lonnie Courtney Clay > > On Wednesday, April 17, 2013 5:30:27 PM UTC-7, Lonnie Clay wrote: >> >> "In some ways I'm not sure why any of us are still working. " >> >> Well, the alternatives to working are taking charity from family or >> friends (I do), accepting government assistance (I do), accepting charity >> from benevolent organizations, living off accumulated wealth, borrowing >> money, or theft. The white collar crimes outweigh the petty thefts by a >> significant factor, often being measured in billions rather than millions. >> I put the increase down to cultural shifting towards dishonesty, caused >> primarily by childhood indoctrination from entertainment media that crime >> DOES pay, and pays quite well. Another factor is increased technological >> capabilities, especially computers, which allow criminals to commit >> esoteric crimes such as identity theft, derivatives fraud, and money >> laundering. Most of the increased law enforcement efforts have been >> ineffective in stemming the tide of crime. Harsher punishments unless well >> publicized are not effective as a deterrent against budding criminals. The >> basic problem is that people can now SEE that others reap rewards without >> hard work, either through crime or free handouts, due to sensationalist >> journalism and entertainment. >> >> One of the more controversial things which I have proposed in the past is >> that handouts NOT be free, that they should require community service in >> exchange. Another is that all criminals should have to pay for their crimes >> not only with incarceration, but also with restitution to victims, and >> remedial counseling before their release. Parole oversight needs to be >> improved as well. >> >> Drug trafficking has become a major worldwide industry due to government >> efforts to stop substance abuse. It didn't work with alcohol and it won't >> work for the rest, it just creates yet another class of criminal. Let the >> drug companies manufacture abused substances just like they do the >> thousands of prescription drugs which have the population hooked-on drugs. >> Require package inserts which detail the bad effects of the drugs and leave >> it up to the individual making the purchase to decide whether to be a user. >> Increase the penalties for crimes committed while under the influence of >> drugs, just as DWI is a higher charge than reckless driving. Make drugging >> someone without their knowledge a 20 year felony. >> >> I don't want to talk any more about crime online, since I suspect that it >> would just be a tutorial for novices. >> >> Lonnie Courtney Clay >> >> On Wednesday, April 17, 2013 3:05:01 PM UTC-7, archytas wrote: >>> >>> I think you get all that right Lonnie. I've been trying to find out >>> what financial sector debt in the UK really is for over two years. In >>> numbers its anything from 230 - 510% of our GDP - a pretty >>> discouraging lack of accuracy - but I want to know its 'quality'. The >>> debt may be a good thing - a set of good performing loans - or it may >>> put the UK in a dire condition because its really Ponzi money relying >>> on asset valuations that are now mostly fictional. If the latter is >>> true the questions are about who will take the haircuts and whether >>> the UK taxpayer/bank account holder/bond holder etc. is on the hook. >>> Otherwise our government/household/corporate debt is comparable with >>> the US. >>> As a scientist I'd want to take a sample of the debt and try to sell >>> it in an open market. Its all currently valued by people with a >>> vested interest in making out everything is profitable - techniques we >>> know are bollox. >>> Frankly I believe all financial services (beyond utility banking) and >>> most economics are uselessly parasitic on genuine work and >>> production. I want to be able to ground this so we can move on to a >>> different way of living. I can barely describe what a putrid swamp >>> the mainstream is. Two Harvard arses, Reinhart & Rogoff have just >>> been exposed cheating as surely as any of my students through >>> spreadsheet manipulation. Their work had been widely used in support >>> of austerity programmes, but now we know they fiddled the figures and >>> the real case on their numbers was against austerity. I can't trust >>> allegedly peer reviewed papers, let alone stuff in which several >>> Enrons are considered as viable and even thriving through bent >>> auditing. >>> In some ways I'm not sure why any of us are still working. >>> >>> On Apr 13, 4:16 pm, Lonnie Clay <claylon...@comcast.net> wrote: >>> > Worldwide economies are foundering upon the rocks of modern >>> entertainments. >>> > I'll make the case for that. The rational response of a person to a >>> > stimulus is to do more of those things which bring pleasure rather >>> than >>> > punishment or boredom. With the rise of fiction in all of its forms, a >>> > person can gain pleasure from imagined world-scapes outside of the >>> "real" >>> > world's boundaries of experience. The pleasure of working life >>> achievement >>> > is limited to those who are both talented and trained to exercise >>> their >>> > talents. So which one do people choose when given the alternatives? >>> They >>> > increasingly choose entertainment, escaping from their fruitless >>> humdrum >>> > day to day existences into imaginary worlds of achievement. One reason >>> for >>> > that is the lack of opportunities in the modern economy resulting from >>> the >>> > failure of the educational systems to prepare people for productive >>> working >>> > careers. Another is the cultural shift towards self-gratification >>> rather >>> > than service to society. A third is the diminished rewards from >>> working >>> > resulting from the marginal reduction of income increase resulting >>> from >>> > government's taxation of wages economic activity. Why work harder to >>> gain >>> > more income when the government takes away more and more as your >>> income >>> > rises? Yet another is the diminished cost of life's necessities and >>> modest >>> > luxuries due to increased efficiency of production from product mass >>> > manufacturing. Why work harder when you have everything which you >>> need? >>> > >>> > These factors result in diminished work force participation, the rise >>> of >>> > the welfare class, fewer employees working hard, market dislocations, >>> and >>> > diminished work ethics. >>> > >>> > Lonnie Courtney Clay >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > On Friday, April 12, 2013 7:48:51 AM UTC-7, nominal9 wrote: >>> > >>> > > Because it is so screwed up throughout the world that not fixing it >>> is >>> > > bound to lead to great social upheaval?????..... I think so. >>> >> -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Epistemology" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to epistemology+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to epistemology@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/epistemology?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
