Linux-Advocacy Digest #677, Volume #28 Sun, 27 Aug 00 05:13:06 EDT
Contents:
Re: Linux programmers dont live on this planet!
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? (Courageous)
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? (T. Max Devlin)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux programmers dont live on this planet!
Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 01:02:51 -0700
Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Marada C. Shradrakaii <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >For
> >those of you new to Linux; "Image" now means "copy", "Server" now means
> >"driver" etc.
>
> 'Image' now means 'copy'? Can you please provide an example of the
context
> this is used in? This is unusual.
>
> 'Server' is just as good a word for the programme as 'driver', perhaps
more.
> 'Driver' gives the impression that it drives the device, making it work,
while
> 'server' more accurately suggests serving the device's features up to
software.
Some of us may have idea as to what this person mean by using the word
"image" but has not provided any information to permit anyone to confirm or
reject his statement in reguards to the usage of the work "image".
In Linux and all unix, a driver is still called a driver. The server that
we have determined that this person may be talking about is an X server
which is not a driver at all although it does use drivers and in some
sitation on some platforms a X server may have to provide some drivers, but
the server is still not a driver. However, as it stands, this person has
been of no assistance in verifing that is were his mistake is.
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 04:23:41 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Eric Bennett in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, ZnU
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[...]
>http://more.abcnews.go.com/sections/business/dailynews/adm980917/index.html
>
>One nice thing about this article is that it ties back into the earlier
>antitrust discussion in this thread and the incorrect claims that were
>made about antitrust never being criminally enforeced.
If you are referring to my comments, I have never claimed such a thing;
only that they were under-enforced.
"A federal jury convicted three past and present Archer Daniels Midland
Co. executives today of conspiring with competitors to fix the price of
the feed additive lysine."
"In 1995, the company itself pleaded guilty to price-fixing involving
lysine and another substance, citric acid. It paid a $100 million fine."
"Bray continually reminded the jury that it is legal for competitors to
exchange information about prices and quantities. In his closing
arguments, Bray showed the jury several snippets of tape transcripts in
which Andreas repeatedly said ADM “doesn’t make deals.” The rest of the
conversations with competitors were a lot of “bluster and bluffing,” he
said."
(And yet they were still convicted, by a jury.)
"At the trial, Lassar produced notes and charts that he says prove that
ADM agreed that it would have a 27 percent share of the world’s $600
million lysine market in 1994—a target that he says the company hit
within tenths of a percentage point. “This was a crime of greed—a crime
by an extremely large corporation that wanted to make even more money at
the expense of their customers,” Lassar said."
"“This is not Business Ethics 101. This is how you deal in the real
world,” Weingarten said. “That’s how Dwayne Andreas told Terry Wilson to
do business.”"
I wonder if Wiengarten realized he's implicating Dwayne Andreas (who was
not indicted) in criminal activity?
Its more than worth pointing out that no mention was made in the article
of what crime, specifically, these guys were convicted of, or should I
say which anti-trust statute they violated. It sounds like the Clayton
Act, though. Probably Section 2, part 13, clause 'b' of which states:
"Upon proof being made, at any hearing on a complaint under this
section, that there has been discrimination in price or services or
facilities furnished, the burden of rebutting the prima-facie case thus
made by showing justification shall be upon the person charged with a
violation of this section, and unless justification shall be
affirmatively shown, the Commission is authorized to issue an order
terminating the discrimination: Provided, however, That nothing herein
contained shall prevent a seller rebutting the prima-facie case thus
made by showing that his lower price or the furnishing of services or
facilities to any purchaser or purchasers was made in good faith to meet
an equally low price of a competitor, or the services or facilities
furnished by a competitor."
This seems further evidence that anti-trust law does not demand
purposeful ignorance in examining whether a company is avoiding
competition.
Perusal of the Clayton Act also provided a potential alternative
prosecution for Microsoft:
Section 14
Sale, etc., on agreement not to use goods of competitor (Section 3 of
the Clayton Act)
It shall be unlawful for any person engaged in commerce, in the course
of such commerce, to lease or make a sale or contract for sale of goods
[...] whether patented or unpatented [...], or fix a price charged
therefor, or discount from, or rebate upon, such price, on the
condition, agreement, or understanding that the lessee or purchaser
thereof shall not use or deal in the goods [...] of a competitor or
competitors of the lessor or seller, where the effect of such lease,
sale, or contract for sale or such condition, agreement, or
understanding may be to substantially lessen competition or tend to
create a monopoly in any line of commerce."
This would be, I presume, the charge that the original (botched) FTC
investigation focused on which eventually led to the 1995 Consent
Decree. Microsoft's per-processor licensing contracts have probably
been carefully tailored to avoid prosecution under this statute, since,
though I'm not presuming they've been successful in this attempt to
avoid illegal behavior.
--
T. Max Devlin
-- Such is my recollection of my reconstruction
of events at the time, as I recall. Consider it.
Research assistance gladly accepted. --
====== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ======
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
======= Over 80,000 Newsgroups = 16 Different Servers! ======
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 04:25:04 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Aaron R. Kulkis in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>"T. Max Devlin" wrote:
>>
>> Said Aaron R. Kulkis in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>> >Joe Ragosta wrote:
>> [...]
>> >> Yet I managed to get a scholarship and loans for Penn State, worked my
>> >> way through school, got into graduate school at Cornell, progressed
>> >> through several jobs of increasing responsibility and ended up as
>> >> President of a small company where I'm making quite a lot of money
>> >> (certainly far more than the level that Democrats consider wealthy,
>> >> although I think their cutoff is way too low).
>> >>
>> >> So what part of the things you cited is impossible?
>> >
>> >According to Liberals....it's not fair...because...YOU SUCCEEDED!
>>
>> According to the liberals, he's a data point. You don't run government
>> based on anecdotal evidence.
>
>Ah yes, whenever anyone points out that the liberal "gloom and doom"
>scenarios don't jive with reality, it's always the old 'anecdotal
>evidence' routine.
No, I'm pointing out that what you consider "reality" is, in fact,
merely anecdotal evidence.
>Don't you get sick of repeating yourself so many times per day,
>every time reality smacks you in the face yet again?
>
>The plural of anecdotal evidence is DATA.
Provide us some better statistics than your personal experience, then.
--
T. Max Devlin
-- Such is my recollection of my reconstruction
of events at the time, as I recall. Consider it.
Research assistance gladly accepted. --
====== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ======
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
======= Over 80,000 Newsgroups = 16 Different Servers! ======
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 04:26:28 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said ZnU in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
[...]
>You should talk. Your hero Reagan was the king of anecdotal evidence.
>Your only argument in support of your sick economic policies is that
>very rarely some people from the bottom manage to pull themselves to the
>top.
Not that Aaron was ever on the bottom. I think we can safely presume
that, despite the limited economic means of his parents, he's a healthy
white male.
--
T. Max Devlin
-- Such is my recollection of my reconstruction
of events at the time, as I recall. Consider it.
Research assistance gladly accepted. --
====== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ======
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
======= Over 80,000 Newsgroups = 16 Different Servers! ======
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 04:30:09 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Joe Ragosta in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[...]
>> This rampant "personal circumstance" bullshit is driving me crazy.
>
>Only because you have a problem with facts.
Only because I have an aversion to basing my decisions on anecdotal
evidence.
>If the previous poster (who I see you've conveniently trimmed) had said
>it was _difficult_ to get ahead, I'd probably have agreed.
The fact that he presumes and insists that it isn't difficult for anyone
to get ahead based on whether it was difficult for him to get ahead, as
a healthy white male, is conveniently lacking from your response.
>But they said it was impossible. All it takes is a single counter
>example to refute that.
Nobody ever said it was impossible, no, and a single counter-example
does not present conclusive evidence of a false hypothesis, since the
counter-example may be due to unrecognized causes without refuting the
general theory.
--
T. Max Devlin
-- Such is my recollection of my reconstruction
of events at the time, as I recall. Consider it.
Research assistance gladly accepted. --
====== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ======
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
======= Over 80,000 Newsgroups = 16 Different Servers! ======
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 04:33:43 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Courageous in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>
>> At best, this system will waste $60 billion of US tax payer money.
>
>Many incidental technologies generally flow from such efforts.
"Star Wars" is not landing a man on the moon, I'm afraid.
>> At worst, it will waste much more and start a another cold war.
>
>I believe this is doubtful.
Well, if you had a background in foreign policy, and the temerity to
post with your real name, perhaps we might care about your belief, one
way or the other.
--
T. Max Devlin
-- Such is my recollection of my reconstruction
of events at the time, as I recall. Consider it.
Research assistance gladly accepted. --
====== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ======
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
======= Over 80,000 Newsgroups = 16 Different Servers! ======
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 04:37:55 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Bob Hauck in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>On Sat, 26 Aug 2000 23:33:45 GMT, Chad Irby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>"First-world" nations have nuclear submarines that work, and don't screw
>>around for a week before asking for help in rescuing the crew.
>
>The US has lost two nuclear subs over the years. I don't know how long
>they "screwed around" though.
Neither does anyone else, because during the Cold War, nobody heard much
about the nuclear subs we've lost, I think.
--
T. Max Devlin
-- Such is my recollection of my reconstruction
of events at the time, as I recall. Consider it.
Research assistance gladly accepted. --
====== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ======
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
======= Over 80,000 Newsgroups = 16 Different Servers! ======
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 04:44:19 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Eric Bennett in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>wrote:
>
>> The point is that they should, and they aren't even paying anywhere near
>> as much as their tax bracket base percentage indicates, while the middle
>> and lower income people generally do.
>
>Really? Count your standard deduction and personal exemption and that's
>$7000 tax free. If you make $21,000 and have no dependents, a third of
>your income is tax-free right off the bat. Now let's say you make
>$80,000... where do you come up with $24,000 in itemized deductions?
The question is where do I come up with $7000, not $24,000. And I
don't; I generally come up with about $3000, but my goal is not to
minimize the amount I contribute to society. Most others in my shoes
might easily pay a crafty accountant to shave another $4K off my tax
bill, through whatever means necessary.
>Last year, I reported more income than $21000, but was still in the 15%
>bracket, and I paid 10.6% of my "total income" (1040, line 22) as tax.
>So I'm only paying 2/3 of what my bracket base percentage indicates.
>You think most people in the top bracket do you think are paying much
>less than 2/3 of their base percentage, or 26%, to the feds?
You're flipping facilely back and forth between amounts and percentages
so fast, I can't tell what would be an equitable burden. I know I pay a
higher percentage now then when I made less than $21,000, though my
actual dollar amount is, of course, much higher than it was then. And
given the amount of civil support which I feel to be necessary and
sufficient (by presumption, which, lacking a control country and a
duplicate T. Max, is all I can do) to support me in earning my
livelihood, I wouldn't complain if it was quite a bit more. I think
most who do complain are merely ignorant or unconcerned with the civil
support on which they unknowingly or unethically base their accumulation
of wealth.
--
T. Max Devlin
-- Such is my recollection of my reconstruction
of events at the time, as I recall. Consider it.
Research assistance gladly accepted. --
====== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ======
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
======= Over 80,000 Newsgroups = 16 Different Servers! ======
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 04:49:25 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Joe Ragosta in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>wrote:
>
>> Said Joe Ragosta in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>> >[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Gregory L. Hansen) wrote:
>> >> Joe Ragosta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> [...]
>> >> Doesn't that 5% also control more than 90% of the wealth?
>> >
>> >
>> >Probably.
>> >
>> >But the point is that even with the Bush tax cuts, they're still paying
>> >a vastly higher percentage of their income in taxes than the poor or
>> >middle class.
>>
>> The point is that they should, and they aren't even paying anywhere near
>> as much as their tax bracket base percentage indicates, while the middle
>> and lower income people generally do.
>
>ROTFLMAO.
>
>I used to be squarely in the middle class and comfortably in the "21%"
>bracket. I actually paid about 5% of my income in income taxes due to
>deductions.
>
>Now, I'm in the 39.6 bracket and pay a much, much higher percentage --
>closer to 25% for federal income tax alone.
>
>But don't let the facts confuse you.
And 21% of your income was...?
And 39.6% of your income is...?
The wealthiest do not pay anywhere near as much [of their income] as
their tax bracket base percentage indicates, while the middle and lower
income people generally do. Because 14.6 percent of your income is much
much more than 16 percent of your previous income, isn't it? The 16%
might have lowered your tax burden by some measly few hundred dollars,
at best. While the 14.6% of your current income is probably more than
the poorest laborers earn to begin with.
--
T. Max Devlin
-- Such is my recollection of my reconstruction
of events at the time, as I recall. Consider it.
Research assistance gladly accepted. --
====== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ======
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
======= Over 80,000 Newsgroups = 16 Different Servers! ======
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 04:51:52 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said JS/PL in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>
>"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> Said Joe Ragosta in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>> [...]
>> >Even if I get what I've been promised, my lifetime return on investment
>> >will probably be negative or in the very low single digits. If I had
>> >been able to invest my Social Security "contribution" in any reasonable
>> >investment, I'd retire extremely wealthy -by almost any standards.
>> >
>> >That IS theft
>>
>> Nobody ever made you any promises, Joe, other than you won't starve to
>> death.
>
>Sound's like a good deal to me.
>"Give us 6.2% of your gross pay all of your life and we'll allow you to live
>below the poverty level on cans of dog food slow cooked over the pilot light
>of your stove, in the dark."
>
>But I like this plan better.
>Put away 6% in an IRA for your whole life and retire early as a
>multi-millionair.
So do that, too, after you've provided for social security, because not
everyone comes out on top in the end, like you hope to. Obviously,
there are more people who might eat dog food on social security than
would retire multi-millionaires.
--
T. Max Devlin
-- Such is my recollection of my reconstruction
of events at the time, as I recall. Consider it.
Research assistance gladly accepted. --
====== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ======
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
======= Over 80,000 Newsgroups = 16 Different Servers! ======
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 04:54:42 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Eric Bennett in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>wrote:
>
>> Said Eric Bennett in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>> >In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, ZnU
>> [...]
>> >So is it theft for rich people who pay tons of money into the fund and
>> >get less back (in absolute dollars) than other people, because their
>> >incomes disqualify them from getting full social security benefits?
>> >
>> >Is it also theft any time I pay taxes to the government, and I don't get
>> >back all that money in the form of government services? [...]
>>
>> No. That's called 'government'. You don't "buy" government when you
>> pay taxes; you pay for government. And it is, unfortunately, an
>> expensive proposition. I am certainly going to advocate any reasoned
>> and feasible reduction in the expenses of government. That isn't a
>> matter of making reactionary demands, though; it is a matter of applying
>> social conscience and rigorous ethics.
>
>Then would you disagree with ZnU that it would be "theft" if someone who
>paid into the social security fund never got any social security
>payments when they retired?
I think that's generally what I've said, though I won't address ZnU's
position by proxy. Social Security is not a retirement plan. If you
never get any benefits, its because there was too much social security
needed by others before you retired or became disabled, and I would hope
that you've provided for your own retirement.
--
T. Max Devlin
-- Such is my recollection of my reconstruction
of events at the time, as I recall. Consider it.
Research assistance gladly accepted. --
====== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ======
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
======= Over 80,000 Newsgroups = 16 Different Servers! ======
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 04:57:32 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said ZnU in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
[...]
>The more fortunate are paying for the benefit of not having the less
>fortunate starving in the streets. Some don't seem to think that's worth
>the expense, but fortunately the government makes them pay anyway.
Well said, 'ZnU'.
--
T. Max Devlin
-- Such is my recollection of my reconstruction
of events at the time, as I recall. Consider it.
Research assistance gladly accepted. --
====== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ======
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
======= Over 80,000 Newsgroups = 16 Different Servers! ======
------------------------------
From: Courageous <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 08:59:58 GMT
> Well, if you had a background in foreign policy, and the temerity to
> post with your real name, perhaps we might care about your belief, one
> way or the other.
That's asinine.
C//
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 05:00:59 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Eric Bennett in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>wrote:
>
>> Said Eric Bennett in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>> >In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, ZnU
>> [...]
>> >I consider Social Security to be fundamentally broken. Look at what it
>> >was originally supposed to do... provide for a few years of
>> >retirement...
>>
>> I strongly disagree. Social Security was not originally supposed to be
>> a retirement plan. It was intended to be security for society; a right
>> to expect that some would not starve while other's remained wealthy.
>
>Then how come anybody who was "starving" didn't qualify for its benefits
>unless they happened to be old?
That isn't the case. That's just the most common case, because before
the recent boom, even a long and productive working life didn't
guarantee a retirement free from poverty.
>> >Maybe you should throw your support behind Nader instead of Gore.
>>
>> The more obvious it becomes that Gore will win (instead of Bush; I don't
>> have anything against him in particular, except that he is a
>> Republican), the more likely it is that I will, indeed, vote for Nader.
>
>I would never vote for Nader but I would love to see him and Buchanan
>allowed into at least one of the debates. I saw Nader on Crossfire a
>couple weeks ago and it was interesting to see him hilight some of
>Gore's hypocritical behavior. That's a good thing. Buchanan can to the
>same to Bush.
Nader wrote a terrific piece in the Wall Street Journal's editorial page
on Friday, practically demanding that debates be held which didn't
exclude everyone but Gore and Bush. The two party system isn't bad when
its the best you can do; it is oppressive when it seeks to monopolize
the public attention, as they are currently doing. Unless a strong
demand is made by the populace, everyone but the Democrat and the
Republican will be excluded from any televised formal debates.
>It forces the major candidates to fully justify all of their positions,
>instead of just being able to ignore certain things because they assume
>they have all the extremist voters locked up and don't need to defend
>their moves toward the center.[...]
I think you mean "locked out", not "locked up".
>Of course, the major parties got burned
>by Perot and Ventura when they were allowed into the debates, so forget
>about either of them allowing a real discussion anymore...
That is something I refuse to forget about, specifically because it is
their intent to prevent any real discussion. I can't tolerate living in
a country that doesn't support the ideal of liberty, which includes a
mandate of free and open debate.
--
T. Max Devlin
-- Such is my recollection of my reconstruction
of events at the time, as I recall. Consider it.
Research assistance gladly accepted. --
====== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ======
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
======= Over 80,000 Newsgroups = 16 Different Servers! ======
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 05:04:46 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said ZnU in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[...]
>> >If you did not have quasi-monopolies for electric authorities you
>> >wouldn't have this happen.
>>
>> If you didn't confuse public utilities with commercial monopolies you
>> would not have this happen. Is that what you mean?
>
>Deregulation is the worst thing that's ever happened to my utility
>bills.
Mine, too, but I think I've made my position on "decision by anecdotal
evidence" rather clear.
>I'm now paying twice what I was last year for electricity
>(despite this being a cooler summer), and I'm paying $38/month for basic
>cable (they just raised rates again). Not a word is being said, because
>both parties voted for it.
--
T. Max Devlin
-- Such is my recollection of my reconstruction
of events at the time, as I recall. Consider it.
Research assistance gladly accepted. --
====== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ======
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
======= Over 80,000 Newsgroups = 16 Different Servers! ======
------------------------------
** FOR YOUR REFERENCE **
The service address, to which questions about the list itself and requests
to be added to or deleted from it should be directed, is:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can send mail to the entire list (and comp.os.linux.advocacy) via:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Linux may be obtained via one of these FTP sites:
ftp.funet.fi pub/Linux
tsx-11.mit.edu pub/linux
sunsite.unc.edu pub/Linux
End of Linux-Advocacy Digest
******************************
