Blackfoot Humor
Title: Message This white advertising executive was called on the carpet and threatened with firing because of some of his ads that had subliminal and double entrendre messages that were decidedly anti-Indian and that had brought [unlikely] a storm of protests against the agency. So they decided to take him off his previous accounts and give him one more chance and he was assigned to come up with an ad campaign for "Johnson Nails" [as in nails used in construction]. Came the day for his presentation, he entered the board room with his powerpoint presentation of his new ad campaign. He hit the button on the computer and up popped a painting of Jesus hanging on the cross with a caption underneath: "FOR THE REALLY TOUGH JOBS, USE ONLY JOHNSON NAILS" The executives present about choked and were aghast. One said: "What the fuck are you doing? You know what kind of shit this is going to bring down on us? It will be ten times worse than the shit you did with the Indians. Get your ass back there and fix this and this time, this is your last chance." A week later this same guy comes in with his amended ad campaign for Johnson Nails. He sets up his powerpoint presentation and hits the key and up pops a picture of an empy blood-stained cross with three nails with the caption: "SHOULD HAVE USED JOHNSON NAILS." Blackfoot love allegorical humor. Jim James M. Craven Blackfoot Name: Omahkohkiaayo-i'poyi Professor/Consultant,Economics;Business Division Chair Clark College, 1800 E. McLoughlin Blvd. Vancouver, WA. USA 98663 Tel: (360) 992-2283; Fax: (360) 992-2863 http://www.home.earthlink.net/~blkfoot5 Employer has no association with private/protected opinion "Who controls the past controls the future. Who controls the present controls the past." (George Orwell) "...every anticipation of results which are first to be proved seems disturbing to me...(Karl Marx, "Grundrisse") FREE LEONARD PELTIER!!
humor
Devine, James wrote: is there an on-line discussion group that specializes in humor? is it called borscht-belt-l? Don't forget news://alt.politics.socialism.trotsky! Doug
Re: humor
Now THAT'S funny. Lisa S. on 09/24/2002 5:42 PM, Doug Henwood at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Devine, James wrote: is there an on-line discussion group that specializes in humor? is it called borscht-belt-l? Don't forget news://alt.politics.socialism.trotsky! Doug
Re: Re: humor
joanna bujes wrote: Don't forget news://alt.politics.socialism.trotsky! Doug Hey Doug. Netscape says it can't find it. Was THAT the joke? Well, too bad, cause this is my one and only chance to tell my Trotsky joke: Heavens no. I haven't visited it in ages. I can't remember the last time I fired up Newswatcher even. Is it gone? Gosh, the world has lost a strange gallery. Doug
Re: humor
Don't forget news://alt.politics.socialism.trotsky! Doug Hey Doug. Netscape says it can't find it. Was THAT the joke? Well, too bad, cause this is my one and only chance to tell my Trotsky joke: A messanger arrives at the Kremlin bearing a telegram. I must speak to Comrade Stalin, he cries breathlessly, I have just received a telegram from Trotsky and he acknowledges that he was wrong, completely wrong! He is led to Stalin who listens patiently while the messanger explains: Comrade Stalin, I bear a very important telegram from Trotsky it says: 'You were right; I was wrong. You can have socialism in one country while the rest of the world is in chains. Trotsky.' You see. We have won! He admits he is wrong and the rift is healed! This is a day for celebration. Just a second, says Stalin, let me see that telegram. He takes the telegram, and looks it over. Ah ha! Just as I thought, he says, Nothing has changed. Let me read it to you correctly: 'You were right? I was wrong? You can have Socialist revolution in one country while the rest of the world is in chains (Joanna)
Re: Re: Re: humor
Doug Henwood wrote: joanna bujes wrote: Don't forget news://alt.politics.socialism.trotsky! Hey Doug. Netscape says it can't find it. Was THAT the joke? Well, too bad, cause this is my one and only chance to tell my Trotsky joke: Heavens no. I haven't visited it in ages. I can't remember the last time I fired up Newswatcher even. Is it gone? Gosh, the world has lost a strange gallery. its very much around, it seems: http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=enlr=ie=UTF-8group=alt.politics.socialism.trotsky the reason joanna cannot see it is because her browser (netscape) is probably not configured for an NNTP (news) server, or her server does not carry that newsgroup. --ravi
RE: Re: Re: humor
Title: RE: [PEN-L:30525] Re: Re: humor it's more likely that Joanna's browser isn't currently set up to read newsgroups. Mine isn't either. Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine -Original Message- From: Doug Henwood [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2002 3:02 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [PEN-L:30525] Re: Re: humor joanna bujes wrote: Don't forget news://alt.politics.socialism.trotsky! Doug Hey Doug. Netscape says it can't find it. Was THAT the joke? Well, too bad, cause this is my one and only chance to tell my Trotsky joke: Heavens no. I haven't visited it in ages. I can't remember the last time I fired up Newswatcher even. Is it gone? Gosh, the world has lost a strange gallery. Doug
RE: RE: Re: Re: humor
Title: RE: [PEN-L:30527] RE: Re: Re: humor I sent the following message: it's more likely that Joanna's browser isn't currently set up to read newsgroups. Mine isn't either. this appears in the archive of the listserver. but the following is what I got from the list in MS Outlook: Symantec AVF replaced the message body with this text message. The original text contained prohibited content and was deleted. what gives? James G. Devine Professor of Economics University Hall (Rm. 4227) Loyola Marymount University One LMU Drive, Suite 4200 Los Angeles, CA 90045-2659 USA 310/338-2948 (work); FAX: 310/338-1950 [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine
Re: RE: RE: Re: Re: humor
RE: [PEN-L:30527] RE: Re: Re: humor - Original Message - From: Devine, James To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2002 3:52 PM Subject: [PEN-L:30531] RE: RE: Re: Re: humor I sent the following message: it's more likely that Joanna's browser isn't currently set up to read newsgroups. Mine isn't either. this appears in the archive of the listserver. but the following is what I got from the list in MS Outlook: Symantec AVF replaced the message body with this text message. The original text contained prohibited content and was deleted. what gives? James G. Devine === Your font's too small? :-) The system may have detected a virus. Ian
Re: humor
Ian in reply to Jim: Your font's too small? :-) Jim, You really need to do something about your font size and this is not a joke. Or maybe it is. But please do something about it. Most of us are not that young anymore, you know? Sabri
Re: Re: humor
Sabri Oncu wrote: But please do something about it. Most of us are not that young anymore, you know? Your mail program _may_ have a command that will increase the font size of the post you are reading. With Netscape Communicator each time one hits Alt V F the font increases. Carrol Sabri
humor
W. wants to balance the budget by reducing taxes. What next? I was wondering last night. What company now in distress would give me the most pleasure by crashing? -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: humor
W. wants to balance the budget by reducing taxes. What next? I was wondering last night. What company now in distress would give me the most pleasure by crashing? -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] == The Southern Baptist Church? The Roman Catholic Church? Ian
Humor
M. Pugliese: But, YUP, as Doug said the other day, pen-l isn't the place for humor, mockery or saracasm, self-deprecation, immolation lest that Old Mole of Criticism Inflame those damn Carbuncles in the marxian Whiskers. ^^^ CB: Or it may be that some people on Pen-L have a different sense of humor than you do. I don't find your posts particularly humorous. On the other hand, I write lots of jokes on Pen-L , so I don't have much experience of it not being a place for humor, as I know it. I'm glad it is not a place for self-immolation (!) As to self-criticism, that appears on Pen-L.
(Unitended) Humor from the National Bureau of Economic Research
If anyone needs an example of the mis-use of cost-benefits analysis...Of course, if something this sloppy and shoddy had been done to justify (for example) increased environmental regulation, it would have been laughed at and dismissed by NBER economist types. This reminds me for three unrelated OP-EDS in the Washington Post yesterday. The columnists, ranging from Novak to Kuttner have just discovered, to their chagrin, that the Bush Administration is Pro-business, not pro-market. It seems at NBER if you are pro-big corporation, pro-military, pro-prison industy, pro-national security state, anything goes. At least the last paragraph of this abstract basically acknowledges that the whole thing is a sham. 2) FAVORABLE EFFECTS OF IMPRISONING DRUG OFFENDERS Annual expenditures of approximately $10 billion on drug incarceration almost pay for themselves through reductions in health care costs and lost productivity attributable to illegal drug use, even ignoring any crime reductions associated with such incarceration. The number of Americans incarcerated on drug-related offenses rose 15-fold between 1980 and 2000, to its current level of 400,000. Despite this enormous increase, there has been no systematic, empirical analysis until now of the implications of the new, tougher drug laws for public safety, drug markets, and public policy. In An Empirical Analysis of Imprisoning Drug Offenders (http://papers.nber.org/papers/W8489), authors Ilyana Kuziemko and Steven Levitt find that the increase in the prison population on drug-related offenses led to reductions in time served for other crimes, especially for less serious offenses. This phenomenon is primarily attributable to the limited space available at penal institutions. However, despite this reduction in time served, other crimes did not increase more than a few percent. The authors also find that incarcerating drug offenders was almost as effective in reducing violent and property crime as was incarcerating other types of offenders. Furthermore, as a consequence of increases in punishments for drug-related crimes, cocaine prices are 10-15 percent higher today than they were in 1985. This jump in price implies that cocaine consumption fell, perhaps as much as 20 percent. The reduction in cocaine use begins to address the long-standing question of whether the enormous costs related to tougher punishment for drug offenses yield similarly large benefits to society. Previous studies suggest that the costs of current levels of incarceration across all crime categories far exceed societal benefits. However, in the case of drug offenders, the authors find that the cost-benefit calculations might be more favorable, because incarceration not only lowers crime, but also drug consumption. Annual expenditures of approximately $10 billion on drug incarceration almost pay for themselves through reductions in health care costs and lost productivity attributable to illegal drug use, even ignoring any crime reductions associated with such incarceration. The authors stress that their figures are speculative and may not include other relevant costs and benefits. They also do not explore other, potentially more effective ways of reducing drug usage rather than incarceration. (Les Picker) Martin L. Brown Chief, Health Services and Economics Branch Applied Research Program Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences National Cancer Institute 6130 Executive Blvd, Rm. EPN-4005 Bethesda, MD 20892-7344 Phone: 301-496-5716 Fax: 301-435-3710 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Some computer humor from an International Web Site
http://rita.thegourmet.com/computers.htmlhttp://rita.thegourmet.com/computers.html Leo Casey United Federation of Teachers 260 Park Avenue South New York, New York 10010-7272 212-98-6869 Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never has, and it never will. If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and yet deprecate agitation are men who want crops without plowing the ground. They want rain without thunder and lightning. They want the ocean without the awful roar of its waters. -- Frederick Douglass -- .
Who says the NY Times lacks a sense of humor?
NY Times, June 6, 2001 C.I.A. Director Is Going to Israel in Effort to Maintain Calm By JANE PERLEZ WASHINGTON, June 5 - The Bush administration announced today that it was sending the director of central intelligence to the Middle East to meet with leaders of Israeli and Palestinian security forces, reversing a policy set when the president took office. Louis Proyect Marxism mailing list: http://www.marxmail.org
humor
Louis Proyect wrote: You can also see contempt for working people in shows like SNL or Mad TV, which offer up skits about feckless messengers, waiters, or truck drivers when they are not mocking black people or the retarded. The funny thing, of course, is that these shows are uniformly unfunny. If I was a writer for one of these shows, I'd be developing material about rich lawyers, investment bankers or pretentious show business figures, not the wretched of the earth. = Here in Finland they have been running old SNLs dating from the time of the Starr Report, and the shows are full of references to Monica Lewinsky's girth as opposed to the behaviour of Clinton. If he is to be upbraded for anything, it seems his choice of a larger-than-Calvin-Klein-model intern is the issue. Poor stuff. To Jackie Mason's credit, his targets mostly concern his own cultural background, and he also has a very Veblenian sense of ostentatious display (as in his comments on people who say they like Picasso paintings or "acquire a taste" for Brie or sushi -- would you like some raw fish instead?). The Larry Sanders Show was an excellent put down of pretentious showbiz types. Michael K.
RE: Re: Re: humor
I think it is more general than that. I have been in situations, some dating back 20 years, some a lot more recent, where members of priveleged groups (rich whites, male physicians, etc.) Told crude anti-black, anti-semetic, anti-women jokes and if you didn't "go along" by laughing, the response was "you have no sense of humor." The more recent experienced involved a President Elect of the AMA and a noted Radiologist telling crude anti-women jokes in public meetings. In the former case I pointedly objected to the Executive Director of the American College of Radiology (a women) and I think they quietly put out the word that these kind of jokes didn't look so good at meeting, especially those related to breast cancer screening. There are still plenty of enclaves that are exclusively or almost exclusively privileged, white and male. When they think you are "one of them" and not on thier guard, you hear some pretty amazing things. -Original Message- From: Carrol Cox [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, March 29, 2001 11:06 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [PEN-L:9792] Re: Re: humor Carrol Cox wrote: If you trace this legend back I suspect you will find its origins in the failure of British feminists to acknowledge how funny forced feeding was. Many feminists have also been lamentably incapable of seeing how funny wife beating is. An offlist communication suggests that I was a bit too elliptic here, and some expansion seems worthwhile. I meant the legend of left humorlessness. I was partly being sarcastic and partly implying a historical hypothesis: that the charge of lacking humor has always been the first line of defense against "uppity women," and that its use against women predates its use against the left in general. And while I can't come up with anexample right now, I'm pretty sure that there has been over the centuries up to including the present a good deal of humor based on wife-beating. This charge is a variant, I believe, of the charge of political correctness -- which *began* as a self=criticism within some women's groups, taking off from references to left debates over correct line, and then was commandeered by the right. (There are several suggested lineages other than this. In the late '60s there were many jokes within the left abour "correct lineism," as well as many earnest arguments as to correcg line.) I think the charge has a material base -- it is amazingly easy to defend *what is* without getting emphatic. It is amazingly difficult to attack *what is* without appearing -- well, too emphatic. Samuel Johnson, commenting on female preachers, compared them to a dog walking on its hind legs: they didn't do it very well but it was amazing that they did it at all. It's easier to make jokes about how bad Joe Hill's metrics are than it would have been for his friends to joke about his being shot. I do remember (long before my own radicalization) people making jokes about the Rosenberg executions. Probably their comrades did not find those jokes funny. Carrol
Re: RE: Re: Re: humor
I think it is more general than that. I have been in situations, some dating back 20 years, some a lot more recent, where members of priveleged groups (rich whites, male physicians, etc.) Told crude anti-black, anti-semetic, anti-women jokes and if you didn't "go along" by laughing, the response was "you have no sense of humor." Actually, the character who inspired this thread--one Joe Queenan--is a frequent guest on the Don Imus show, which along with the Howard Stern show, encapsulates what's wrong with mainstream humor. Unlike the Marx Brothers, Mark Twain or Jonathan Swift, humor on these shows targets the weak, the underprivileged and the discriminated against. I once heard Queenan riffing on the Imus show about the tackiness and bad food at Red Lobster restaurants, which was in line with a book he was promoting titled "Red Lobster, White Trash, and the Blue Lagoon: Joe Queenan's America." It's really a snobbish dig at ordinary working people and how they live. The irony is that Don Imus started out as a blue collar worker and ended up as a multimillionaire playing off his blue collar mystique. It is all bullshit, of course. Imus has the reputation of being a "bad boy" who insults his ruling class guests, but in actuality he is a modern day court jester. The social role of a court jester was to mock the King without getting to close to the social relations that give him his real power. You can also see contempt for working people in shows like SNL or Mad TV, which offer up skits about feckless messengers, waiters, or truck drivers when they are not mocking black people or the retarded. The funny thing, of course, is that these shows are uniformly unfunny. If I was a writer for one of these shows, I'd be developing material about rich lawyers, investment bankers or pretentious show business figures, not the wretched of the earth. Louis Proyect Marxism mailing list: http://www.marxmail.org
Re: Re: RE: Re: Re: humor
Louis Proyect wrote: Actually, the character who inspired this thread--one Joe Queenan--is a frequent guest on the Don Imus show, which along with the Howard Stern show, encapsulates what's wrong with mainstream humor. Unlike the Marx Brothers, Mark Twain or Jonathan Swift, humor on these shows targets the weak, the underprivileged and the discriminated against. I once heard Queenan riffing on the Imus show about the tackiness and bad food at Red Lobster restaurants, which was in line with a book he was promoting titled Red Lobster, White Trash, and the Blue Lagoon: Joe Queenan's America. Queenan profiled me in Barron's about 10 years ago (on orders from his then-editor, not on his own initiatve), and I got to know him a bit. He's a pretty vile piece of work - right wing, cynical, selfish, and mean. His poliitcs and his personality are a perfect match. He can be funny sometimes - he did a piece on the men's movement for GQ that was hilarious - but not very often. Like O'Rourke, he thinks it's really funny to piss on the poor and weak. Ha ha. Fortunately most of his books end up quickly remaindered. Doug
humor
[was: Re: [PEN-L:9723] RE: Re: RE: Re: A Fair Deal?] David S. wrote: Michael -- I am not surprised at all that you don't find P.J. O'Rourke funny. You don't strike me as a Republican Party Reptile. What about Dave Barry -- another semi-libertarian? Dave Barry is very funny (at least to me), as is Scott "Dilbert" Adams. But I notice that these guys have been shifting to the left. --- Today's (3/29/01) Dilbert -- frame# 1. TV says to Dilbert: "Buy your electricity from the Dogbert Power Company." frame# 2. Dogbert saying to the TV camera: "We generate all of our power with the help of California environmentalists." frame# 3. Workers at power plant: "These are getting harder to find lately." (carrying an environmentalist, bound gagged, to be stuffed in the furnace.) - I can't cite evidence about Dave Barry. In fact, do Lefties have a sense of humor? Or do you have to wait until the revolution comes before you are permitted to smile? (BTW, not all leftists are revolutionaries, as should be obvious from pen-l.) My experience is that people who lack a sense of humor are distributed randomly across the political spectra. The sort who are typically humorless are called "politically correct," a group that is also randomly distributed in this way. Listen to some of the anti-abortion folks some time. Bureaucrats of all types fit this category. Leftists strive to keep their jokes from being at the expense of those who have been getting the short end of the societal stick for generations, which sometimes cramps their style. (However, it does encourage the practice of the highest form of humor, i.e., plays on words.) This is sometimes encouraged by the defensive posture encouraged by being a small minority of the population. But if you can find a copy, look at THE BIG RED JOKE BOOK (Pluto Press, 1980s?) some time. It's got a lot of great jokes, often at the expense of bureaucrats. Some of the best jokes come from anarchists (on the left) and libertarians (on the right). This is probably because these folks believe in breaking down societal barriers (like Lenny Bruce). But sometimes they end up dwelling on being obnoxious, like P.J. O'Rourke, who ends up being funny only to those who enjoy hate and right-wing resentment. Bill Maher has tendencies of this sort. Q: How many post-modernists does it take to screw in a light bulb? A: none -- that would end up replicating the totalizing modernist vision perpetrated by the Enlightenment. Q: How many romantic conservatives does it take to screw in a light bulb? A: none -- that would lead to the Enlightenment-inspired destruction of the traditions that hold society together. Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine
conservative humor
David's question about conservative/liberal humor got me thinking. What kind of humor characterizes different political movements? All groups can poke fun at particular individuals. Clinton's eating habits or George W.'s speech patterns are obvious examples. David mentioned O'Rourke. I'm only seen him a couple times and never read him, but the humor recall was making fun of certain types of people. When I think of Lenny Bruce, I think if someone making light of human condition rather than particular people. Anyway, as somebody who had been pegged as Chico Marx, and whose namesake used to write the scripts for the Marx Brothers movies, I should be permitted to pontificate about humor. -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: humor
How many Madisonians does it take to screw in a light bulb? Answer: Three. One to screw in the light bulb, one to order the morning buns, and one to reminisce about the sixties. How many Californians does it take to screw in a light bulb? Answer: Five. One to screw in the light bulb and four to share the experience. and my all time fave How many Zen Buddhists does it take to screw in a light bulb? Answer: Two. One to screw in the light bulb and one NOT to screw in the light bulb. Barkley Rosser - Original Message - From: "Jim Devine" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, March 29, 2001 11:18 AM Subject: [PEN-L:9734] humor [was: Re: [PEN-L:9723] RE: Re: RE: Re: A Fair Deal?] David S. wrote: Michael -- I am not surprised at all that you don't find P.J. O'Rourke funny. You don't strike me as a Republican Party Reptile. What about Dave Barry -- another semi-libertarian? Dave Barry is very funny (at least to me), as is Scott "Dilbert" Adams. But I notice that these guys have been shifting to the left. --- Today's (3/29/01) Dilbert -- frame# 1. TV says to Dilbert: "Buy your electricity from the Dogbert Power Company." frame# 2. Dogbert saying to the TV camera: "We generate all of our power with the help of California environmentalists." frame# 3. Workers at power plant: "These are getting harder to find lately." (carrying an environmentalist, bound gagged, to be stuffed in the furnace.) - I can't cite evidence about Dave Barry. In fact, do Lefties have a sense of humor? Or do you have to wait until the revolution comes before you are permitted to smile? (BTW, not all leftists are revolutionaries, as should be obvious from pen-l.) My experience is that people who lack a sense of humor are distributed randomly across the political spectra. The sort who are typically humorless are called "politically correct," a group that is also randomly distributed in this way. Listen to some of the anti-abortion folks some time. Bureaucrats of all types fit this category. Leftists strive to keep their jokes from being at the expense of those who have been getting the short end of the societal stick for generations, which sometimes cramps their style. (However, it does encourage the practice of the highest form of humor, i.e., plays on words.) This is sometimes encouraged by the defensive posture encouraged by being a small minority of the population. But if you can find a copy, look at THE BIG RED JOKE BOOK (Pluto Press, 1980s?) some time. It's got a lot of great jokes, often at the expense of bureaucrats. Some of the best jokes come from anarchists (on the left) and libertarians (on the right). This is probably because these folks believe in breaking down societal barriers (like Lenny Bruce). But sometimes they end up dwelling on being obnoxious, like P.J. O'Rourke, who ends up being funny only to those who enjoy hate and right-wing resentment. Bill Maher has tendencies of this sort. Q: How many post-modernists does it take to screw in a light bulb? A: none -- that would end up replicating the totalizing modernist vision perpetrated by the Enlightenment. Q: How many romantic conservatives does it take to screw in a light bulb? A: none -- that would lead to the Enlightenment-inspired destruction of the traditions that hold society together. Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine
Re: Re: humor
four to share the experience. and my all time fave How many Zen Buddhists does it take to screw in a light bulb? Answer: Two. One to screw in the light bulb and one NOT to screw in the light bulb. Barkley Rosser No. It's four. the 3rd screws in the non-light bulb the 4th non-screws the light bulb and the non-light bulb Ian
Re: Re: humor
At 01:39 PM 3/29/01 -0500, you wrote: How many Madisonians does it take to screw in a light bulb? my answer is the same, and different, based on political theory: Three, because one person can't be trusted with all the power. How many Californians does it take to screw in a light bulb? Answer: Five. One to screw in the light bulb and four to share the experience. you should know better! Californians don't screw in light bulbs! they do so in hot-tubs. Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine
Re: Re: Re: humor
How many Teamsters does it take to change a light bulb? Thirteen. You have a problem with that?
RE: Re: humor
Now you have inspired me: Q: How many Marxists does it take to screw in a light bulb? A: None -- The light bulb's own internal contradictions contain the seeds of its own revolution. A: Two - one to screw it in, and a second to hand out leaflets. Q: How many conservatives does it take to change a light bulb? A: One -- after reflecting in the twilight on the merit of the previous bulb. Q: How many running-dog lackeys of the bourgeoisie does it take to change a light bulb? A: None -- that's the proletariat's work! Q: How many Chinese Red Guards does it take to screw in a light bulb? A: 10,000 - to give the bulb a cultural revolution. Q: How many nihilists does it take to change a light bulb? A: There is nothing to change. Q: How many economists does it take to screw in a light bulb? A: Two. One to assume the ladder and one to change the bulb. See generally: http://dir.yahoo.com/Entertainment/Humor/Jokes/Light_Bulb_Jokes/ David Shemano
RE: RE: Re: humor
Correction. I meant the SAME one -Original Message- From: Brown, Martin (NCI) Sent: Thursday, March 29, 2001 2:22 PM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: [PEN-L:9755] RE: Re: humor How many quantum mechanics does it take to screw in the light bulb? One to screw it in at a probability of 95% and one to not screw it in at a probability of 5%. -Original Message- From: J. Barkley Rosser, Jr. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, March 29, 2001 1:40 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [PEN-L:9749] Re: humor How many Madisonians does it take to screw in a light bulb? Answer: Three. One to screw in the light bulb, one to order the morning buns, and one to reminisce about the sixties. How many Californians does it take to screw in a light bulb? Answer: Five. One to screw in the light bulb and four to share the experience. and my all time fave How many Zen Buddhists does it take to screw in a light bulb? Answer: Two. One to screw in the light bulb and one NOT to screw in the light bulb. Barkley Rosser - Original Message - From: "Jim Devine" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, March 29, 2001 11:18 AM Subject: [PEN-L:9734] humor [was: Re: [PEN-L:9723] RE: Re: RE: Re: A Fair Deal?] David S. wrote: Michael -- I am not surprised at all that you don't find P.J. O'Rourke funny. You don't strike me as a Republican Party Reptile. What about Dave Barry -- another semi-libertarian? Dave Barry is very funny (at least to me), as is Scott "Dilbert" Adams. But I notice that these guys have been shifting to the left. --- Today's (3/29/01) Dilbert -- frame# 1. TV says to Dilbert: "Buy your electricity from the Dogbert Power Company." frame# 2. Dogbert saying to the TV camera: "We generate all of our power with the help of California environmentalists." frame# 3. Workers at power plant: "These are getting harder to find lately." (carrying an environmentalist, bound gagged, to be stuffed in the furnace.) - I can't cite evidence about Dave Barry. In fact, do Lefties have a sense of humor? Or do you have to wait until the revolution comes before you are permitted to smile? (BTW, not all leftists are revolutionaries, as should be obvious from pen-l.) My experience is that people who lack a sense of humor are distributed randomly across the political spectra. The sort who are typically humorless are called "politically correct," a group that is also randomly distributed in this way. Listen to some of the anti-abortion folks some time. Bureaucrats of all types fit this category. Leftists strive to keep their jokes from being at the expense of those who have been getting the short end of the societal stick for generations, which sometimes cramps their style. (However, it does encourage the practice of the highest form of humor, i.e., plays on words.) This is sometimes encouraged by the defensive posture encouraged by being a small minority of the population. But if you can find a copy, look at THE BIG RED JOKE BOOK (Pluto Press, 1980s?) some time. It's got a lot of great jokes, often at the expense of bureaucrats. Some of the best jokes come from anarchists (on the left) and libertarians (on the right). This is probably because these folks believe in breaking down societal barriers (like Lenny Bruce). But sometimes they end up dwelling on being obnoxious, like P.J. O'Rourke, who ends up being funny only to those who enjoy hate and right-wing resentment. Bill Maher has tendencies of this sort. Q: How many post-modernists does it take to screw in a light bulb? A: none -- that would end up replicating the totalizing modernist vision perpetrated by the Enlightenment. Q: How many romantic conservatives does it take to screw in a light bulb? A: none -- that would lead to the Enlightenment-inspired destruction of the traditions that hold society together. Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine
RE: Re: humor
How many quantum mechanics does it take to screw in the light bulb? One to screw it in at a probability of 95% and one to not screw it in at a probability of 5%. -Original Message- From: J. Barkley Rosser, Jr. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, March 29, 2001 1:40 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [PEN-L:9749] Re: humor How many Madisonians does it take to screw in a light bulb? Answer: Three. One to screw in the light bulb, one to order the morning buns, and one to reminisce about the sixties. How many Californians does it take to screw in a light bulb? Answer: Five. One to screw in the light bulb and four to share the experience. and my all time fave How many Zen Buddhists does it take to screw in a light bulb? Answer: Two. One to screw in the light bulb and one NOT to screw in the light bulb. Barkley Rosser - Original Message - From: "Jim Devine" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, March 29, 2001 11:18 AM Subject: [PEN-L:9734] humor [was: Re: [PEN-L:9723] RE: Re: RE: Re: A Fair Deal?] David S. wrote: Michael -- I am not surprised at all that you don't find P.J. O'Rourke funny. You don't strike me as a Republican Party Reptile. What about Dave Barry -- another semi-libertarian? Dave Barry is very funny (at least to me), as is Scott "Dilbert" Adams. But I notice that these guys have been shifting to the left. --- Today's (3/29/01) Dilbert -- frame# 1. TV says to Dilbert: "Buy your electricity from the Dogbert Power Company." frame# 2. Dogbert saying to the TV camera: "We generate all of our power with the help of California environmentalists." frame# 3. Workers at power plant: "These are getting harder to find lately." (carrying an environmentalist, bound gagged, to be stuffed in the furnace.) - I can't cite evidence about Dave Barry. In fact, do Lefties have a sense of humor? Or do you have to wait until the revolution comes before you are permitted to smile? (BTW, not all leftists are revolutionaries, as should be obvious from pen-l.) My experience is that people who lack a sense of humor are distributed randomly across the political spectra. The sort who are typically humorless are called "politically correct," a group that is also randomly distributed in this way. Listen to some of the anti-abortion folks some time. Bureaucrats of all types fit this category. Leftists strive to keep their jokes from being at the expense of those who have been getting the short end of the societal stick for generations, which sometimes cramps their style. (However, it does encourage the practice of the highest form of humor, i.e., plays on words.) This is sometimes encouraged by the defensive posture encouraged by being a small minority of the population. But if you can find a copy, look at THE BIG RED JOKE BOOK (Pluto Press, 1980s?) some time. It's got a lot of great jokes, often at the expense of bureaucrats. Some of the best jokes come from anarchists (on the left) and libertarians (on the right). This is probably because these folks believe in breaking down societal barriers (like Lenny Bruce). But sometimes they end up dwelling on being obnoxious, like P.J. O'Rourke, who ends up being funny only to those who enjoy hate and right-wing resentment. Bill Maher has tendencies of this sort. Q: How many post-modernists does it take to screw in a light bulb? A: none -- that would end up replicating the totalizing modernist vision perpetrated by the Enlightenment. Q: How many romantic conservatives does it take to screw in a light bulb? A: none -- that would lead to the Enlightenment-inspired destruction of the traditions that hold society together. Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine
RE: RE: Re: humor
Q: How many neoclassical economists does it take to screw in a light bulb? A: It would never get screwed in because the dark room exists and therefore must be the result of market efficiency and pareto optimality so there is no reason to screw in a light bulb; i.e. just accept the darkness, it is the best of all possible worlds OR it is not the best of all possible worlds but it is better than any other room in the house (did anybody look?)
Re: humor
David posted: Now you have inspired me: Q: How many Marxists does it take to screw in a light bulb? A: None -- The light bulb's own internal contradictions contain the seeds of its own revolution. A: Two - one to screw it in, and a second to hand out leaflets. Q: How many conservatives does it take to change a light bulb? A: One -- after reflecting in the twilight on the merit of the previous bulb. The joke on Marxists is not unfunny, but the joke on conservatives don't work well, in that today's "conservatives" seldom reflect on the merit of the previous bulb. Where's an American conservative today who writes like Michael Oakeshott? Yoshie Postscript: Q. How many graduate students does it take to screw in a light bulb? A. One, but it takes him eight years.
Re: RE: RE: Re: humor
At 02:27 PM 3/29/01 -0500, you wrote: Q: How many neoclassical economists does it take to screw in a light bulb? A: It's hard to tell, but one thing we know is that the government can't be trusted to do so! or: A: first we have to prove that the light bulb exists! Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine
Re: RE: Re: humor
- Original Message - From: "Brown, Martin (NCI)" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, March 29, 2001 11:22 AM Subject: [PEN-L:9755] RE: Re: humor How many quantum mechanics does it take to screw in the light bulb? One to screw it in at a probability of 95% and one to not screw it in at a probability of 5%. ** How many economists does it take to flog a joke about light bulbs into oblivion? Ian
Re: Re: RE: Re: humor
How many economists does it take to flog a joke about light bulbs into oblivion? Ian at least it's not a pointless flame-war, though of course the latter would make screwing in the light bulb unnecessary. Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine
RE: Re: RE: RE: Re: humor
At 02:27 PM 3/29/01 -0500, you wrote: Q: How many neoclassical economists does it take to screw in a light bulb? A: The bulb would not have burned out in the first place if not for government regulation. Eric .
Re: Re: humor
Yoshie Furuhashi wrote: Postscript: Q. How many graduate students does it take to screw in a light bulb? A. One, but it takes him eight years. probably the more correct answer is: Q. How many graduate students does it take to screw in a light bulb? A. one graduate student and one professor. the student to do the work and the professor to take the credit. to tie it into another thread, i have heard an interesting spin on an old joke, worth repeating: response from classical economics professor in india to student who suggests that socialism might have something to do with kerala's higher literacy and freedoms: "it might all work very well in practice but it will never work in theory". --ravi -- man is said to be a rational animal. i do not know why he has not been defined as an affective or feeling animal. more often i have seen a cat reason than laugh or weep. perhaps it weeps or laughs inwardly - but then perhaps, also inwardly, the crab resolves equations of the 2nd degree. -- alasdair macintyre.
Re: Re: Re: RE: Re: humor
- Original Message - From: "Jim Devine" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, March 29, 2001 11:40 AM Subject: [PEN-L:9763] Re: Re: RE: Re: humor How many economists does it take to flog a joke about light bulbs into oblivion? Ian at least it's not a pointless flame-war, though of course the latter would make screwing in the light bulb unnecessary. Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine * Hey somebody has to play the humor police lest we escalate and the secret Monty Python joke is rolled out and we're all killed. Joe Friday
Re: Re: Re: humor
How many ants does it take to screw in a light bulb? Answer: Two, if they can get inside. Barkley Rosser - Original Message - From: "Jim Devine" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, March 29, 2001 2:02 PM Subject: [PEN-L:9752] Re: Re: humor At 01:39 PM 3/29/01 -0500, you wrote: How many Madisonians does it take to screw in a light bulb? my answer is the same, and different, based on political theory: Three, because one person can't be trusted with all the power. How many Californians does it take to screw in a light bulb? Answer: Five. One to screw in the light bulb and four to share the experience. you should know better! Californians don't screw in light bulbs! they do so in hot-tubs. Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine
Re: Re: humor
I don't know if there ever will be an answer to Yoshie's question: "Where's an American conservative today who writes like Michael Oakeshott?" because it would actually require such a conservative to have a sense of humor (or irony even), although at the risk of pen-l ad hominem censure, I nominate D'Souza's writings before his relationship with noted pundette, Laura Ingram or are they even funnier afterwards? Since "Celebrity Death Match" has come on the air, a D'Souza vs. Cornel West steel cage match would be nice. And I especially like Jim's: " Q: How many post-modernists does it take to screw in a light bulb? A: none -- that would end up replicating the totalizing modernist vision perpetrated by the Enlightenment. Q: How many romantic conservatives does it take to screw in a light bulb? A: none -- that would lead to the Enlightenment-inspired destruction of the traditions that hold society together.
Re: RE: RE: Re: humor
How many real men does it take to screw in a light bulb? Answer: None. Real men are not afraid of the dark. How many Jewish mothers does it take to screw in a light bulb? Answer: None. They would rather suffer in the darkness. How many WASPs does it take to screw in a light bulb? Answer: Two. One to screw it in and the other to fix the martinis. How many rednecks does it take to screw in a light bulb? Answer: Four. One to screw it in, one to write a country music song about how hard it was to do it, and two to go out in the parking lot and have a fight about it. How many Virginians does it take to screw in a light bulb? Answer: Five. One to screw it in, and four to talk about how great the old bulb was Barkley Rosser - Original Message - From: "Brown, Martin (NCI)" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, March 29, 2001 2:27 PM Subject: [PEN-L:9758] RE: RE: Re: humor Q: How many neoclassical economists does it take to screw in a light bulb? A: It would never get screwed in because the dark room exists and therefore must be the result of market efficiency and pareto optimality so there is no reason to screw in a light bulb; i.e. just accept the darkness, it is the best of all possible worlds OR it is not the best of all possible worlds but it is better than any other room in the house (did anybody look?)
left humor
The Economy It's Not Going to Get Better, Brace for Recession (March 15, 2001) By Greg Tarpinian, LRA Executive Director Just a couple of weeks ago most mainstream economic forecasters saw the economy heading for a much vaunted "soft landing" under the steady hand of Fed impresario Alan Greenspan. The forecasters are now in a tizzy, as the newest tumult in the stock market indicates that the economy is on the brink of recession. The U.S. and global economies are sending more negative signals about the future today than at any time since the U.S. business cycle upturn began almost ten years ago. We are at a point in the business cycle where the "soft landing" scenario has no more than a 30% chance of coming to fruition. We are at a point in the business cycle where the "soft landing" scenario has no more than a 30% chance of coming to fruition. The basic economic numbers, however, are not giving a clear indication as to which way this economy is going to go. Retail sales are weak. Manufacturing is in a recession. The stock market is in the pits and probably going to decline further. Consumer confidence is way down. On the other hand, existing home sales continue to rise, the leading index rose in January after declining the previous three months, and people's actual reports on their economic situation have not deteriorated. But the fundamental fact of the economy is a shift in sentiment that is so strongly negative that it is hard to imagine a new burst in consumer and investment spending. And you can forget about the accuracy of economic forecasters. Historically, they have consistently missed turning points in the economyboth up and down. Econometric models have a hard time with qualitative changes (particularly those related to dramatic changes in expectations); structural changes (like the new role of Information Technology and the changing structure of capital markets); and unanticipated shocks (like the Asian contagion, the Russian flu, the oil price rise, or the Long Term Capital crisis). The more than 60% drop in the NASDAQ, the more than 20% drop in the SP 500, and the recession level readings in consumer confidence make a soft landing increasingly unlikely. Most soft-landing scenarios rest on the assumption that Alan Greenspan has everything under control and a few interest rate cuts will tweak the economy sufficiently to restart growth. It is certainly the case that his knowing hand on the money spigot will be tested this time around. At this stage it does not look like the standard half-point rate cut everyone expects next week will do anything for the stock market, and the combined rate cuts over the last several months appear to have been too little, too late. Where Wall Street pundits see a steady confident hand, it is easy in our view to see fear. As Greenspan told Congress on February 28, "The risks continue skewed toward the economy's remaining on a path inconsistent with satisfactory performance." This is not a strong vote of economic confidence from the Chairman. At the same time, Greenspan's remarks to a group of bankers on March 7 reveal that he is scared to death of a looming credit crunch. According to Greenspan "lenders and their supporters should be mindful that in their zeal to make up for past excesses, they do not overcompensate and inhibit or cut off the flow of credit to borrowers with credible projects." If Greenspan succeeds in keeping this economy moving forward with interest rate cuts, then we will all be grateful. But we need also consider the fact that Greenspan is not so leery of recession. In fact, based on his past views, we can assume that he would see a little recession as a good thing, insofar as it stopped the modest rise in labor costs. It's hard to see past the destruction of more than $3 trillion in stock market wealth and the worst consumer confidence readings since the last recession. The six Fed rate increases between 1999 and 2,000 certainly burst the bubble of "irrational exuberance," but, unlike 1987, the destruction of market value has been more like a slow leak than a pop. In 1987, the Fed acted immediately, because a 27% one-day fall in the Dow Jones required it. This time around, the Fed took six months to react to a certifiable bear market. With the NASDAQ below 2,000 we are quite possibly in the midst of the worst bear market in history. Investors are reacting accordinglypulling billions out of the stock market and parking it in cash and safe bondsand beginning to hunker down on the spending side. And we see a continued deterioration in stock values based on the fact that price-earnings rations are still historically high. For example, the SP p/e ratio is 24, compared to an historical average of 14 between 1871 and 1995, and the NASDAQ still has a p/e ratio of 163, compared to an historical average of since 1985 of 52. (Wall Street Journal, 3/15/01) Unlike the
humor
Actually a lot of conservative writings/speeches are big jokes. Reagan was a real hoot, so are William F. Buckley ,Jr. Laffer, Milton Friedman. Remember Gerald Ford's Charlie Chaplin routine ? Tragicomedy is a rightwing speciality. CB [EMAIL PROTECTED] 03/29/01 03:45PM I don't know if there ever will be an answer to Yoshie's question: "Where's an American conservative today who writes like Michael Oakeshott?" because it would actually require such a conservative to have a sense of humor (or irony even), although at the risk of pen-l ad hominem censure, I nominate D'Souza's writings before his relationship with noted pundette, Laura Ingram or are they even funnier afterwards? Since "Celebrity Death Match" has come on the air, a D'Souza vs. Cornel West steel cage match would be nice. And I especially like Jim's: " Q: How many post-modernists does it take to screw in a light bulb? A: none -- that would end up replicating the totalizing modernist vision perpetrated by the Enlightenment. Q: How many romantic conservatives does it take to screw in a light bulb? A: none -- that would lead to the Enlightenment-inspired destruction of the traditions that hold society together.
Re: humor
My favorite Laffer story is when I saw him debate JK Galbraith at Harvard and he broke into an accented broken English to disparage the Mexican economy. The right defintely has a supply-side perspective on humor. - Original Message - From: "Charles Brown" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, March 29, 2001 4:05 PM Subject: [PEN-L:9781] humor Actually a lot of conservative writings/speeches are big jokes. Reagan was a real hoot, so are William F. Buckley ,Jr. Laffer, Milton Friedman. Remember Gerald Ford's Charlie Chaplin routine ? Tragicomedy is a rightwing speciality. CB [EMAIL PROTECTED] 03/29/01 03:45PM I don't know if there ever will be an answer to Yoshie's question: "Where's an American conservative today who writes like Michael Oakeshott?" because it would actually require such a conservative to have a sense of humor (or irony even), although at the risk of pen-l ad hominem censure, I nominate D'Souza's writings before his relationship with noted pundette, Laura Ingram or are they even funnier afterwards? Since "Celebrity Death Match" has come on the air, a D'Souza vs. Cornel West steel cage match would be nice. And I especially like Jim's: " Q: How many post-modernists does it take to screw in a light bulb? A: none -- that would end up replicating the totalizing modernist vision perpetrated by the Enlightenment. Q: How many romantic conservatives does it take to screw in a light bulb? A: none -- that would lead to the Enlightenment-inspired destruction of the traditions that hold society together.
Re: Re: humor
Postscript: Q. How many graduate students does it take to screw in a light bulb? A. One, but it takes him eight years. Q: How many actors does it take to screw in a light bulb? A: 10.. One to screw in the lightbulb and 9 to stand below and shout "that should be me up there!"
Re: Re: humor
If you trace this legend back I suspect you will find its origins in the failure of British feminists to acknowledge how funny forced feeding was. Many feminists have also been lamentably incapable of seeing how funny wife beating is. Carrol
Re: Re: humor
Carrol Cox wrote: If you trace this legend back I suspect you will find its origins in the failure of British feminists to acknowledge how funny forced feeding was. Many feminists have also been lamentably incapable of seeing how funny wife beating is. An offlist communication suggests that I was a bit too elliptic here, and some expansion seems worthwhile. I meant the legend of left humorlessness. I was partly being sarcastic and partly implying a historical hypothesis: that the charge of lacking humor has always been the first line of defense against "uppity women," and that its use against women predates its use against the left in general. And while I can't come up with anexample right now, I'm pretty sure that there has been over the centuries up to including the present a good deal of humor based on wife-beating. This charge is a variant, I believe, of the charge of political correctness -- which *began* as a self=criticism within some women's groups, taking off from references to left debates over correct line, and then was commandeered by the right. (There are several suggested lineages other than this. In the late '60s there were many jokes within the left abour "correct lineism," as well as many earnest arguments as to correcg line.) I think the charge has a material base -- it is amazingly easy to defend *what is* without getting emphatic. It is amazingly difficult to attack *what is* without appearing -- well, too emphatic. Samuel Johnson, commenting on female preachers, compared them to a dog walking on its hind legs: they didn't do it very well but it was amazing that they did it at all. It's easier to make jokes about how bad Joe Hill's metrics are than it would have been for his friends to joke about his being shot. I do remember (long before my own radicalization) people making jokes about the Rosenberg executions. Probably their comrades did not find those jokes funny. Carrol
Re: Re: RE: RE: Re: humor
Okay. Seeing how this is completely pointless: Q. How many surrealists does it take to screw in a light bulb? A. Fish. --- "J. Barkley Rosser, Jr." [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: How many real men does it take to screw in a light bulb? Answer: None. Real men are not afraid of the dark. How many Jewish mothers does it take to screw in a light bulb? Answer: None. They would rather suffer in the darkness. How many WASPs does it take to screw in a light bulb? Answer: Two. One to screw it in and the other to fix the martinis. How many rednecks does it take to screw in a light bulb? Answer: Four. One to screw it in, one to write a country music song about how hard it was to do it, and two to go out in the parking lot and have a fight about it. How many Virginians does it take to screw in a light bulb? Answer: Five. One to screw it in, and four to talk about how great the old bulb was Barkley Rosser - Original Message - From: "Brown, Martin (NCI)" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, March 29, 2001 2:27 PM Subject: [PEN-L:9758] RE: RE: Re: humor Q: How many neoclassical economists does it take to screw in a light bulb? A: It would never get screwed in because the dark room exists and therefore must be the result of market efficiency and pareto optimality so there is no reason to screw in a light bulb; i.e. just accept the darkness, it is the best of all possible worlds OR it is not the best of all possible worlds but it is better than any other room in the house (did anybody look?) = Subscribe to the Chico Examiner for only $30 annually or $20 for six months. Mail cash or check payabe to "Tim Bousquet" to POBox 4627, Chico CA 95927 __ Do You Yahoo!? Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail. http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/?.refer=text
gallows humor
http://www.ny.frb.org/rmaghome/curr_iss/ci6-14.html December 2000 Volume 6, Number 14 Lowering Electricity Prices through Deregulation Thomas Klitgaard and Rekha Reddy A wave of regulatory reform is now transforming the U.S. electricity industry. As state and federal authorities allow independent power producers to compete with utilities in supplying electricity, consumers are paying close attention to the effects of this change on their energy bills. Although deregulation poses significant structural challenges, the introduction of competitive pressures should ultimately lead to efficiency gains for the industry and cost savings for households and businesses. -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Humor: Newspaper Readers
[received over the web...] Newspaper Readers: To help us understand whom we're dealing with . . . . The Wall Street Journal is read by the people who run the country. The New York Times is read by people who think they run the country. The Washington Post is read by people who think they ought to run the country. USA Today is read by people who think they ought to run the country but don't understand the Washington Post. The Los Angeles Times is read by people who wouldn't mind running the country, if they could spare the time. The Boston Globe is read by people whose parents used to run the country. The New York Daily News is read by people who aren't too sure who's running the country. The New York Post is read by people who don't care who's running the country, as long as they do something scandalous. The San Francisco Chronicle is read by people who aren't sure there is a country, or that anyone is running it. The Miami Herald is read by people who are running another country. Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine
economics humor
A distraught man consulted a clergyman regarding his situation. The clergyman recommended to open a Bible and see the first words that he comes upon. Sometime later, the clergyman encounters the man, who had previously been disheveled and not looking very prosperous. Now the man looks well groomed and quite prosperous. The clergyman asks what has happened. The man responds that he has followed the clergyman's advice. He opened his Bible and the first words he found were "Chapter 11." -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
humor
A few "famous quotations": Mark Twain: "It's not what we don't know that hurts us; - it's that we know so much that ain't true." "It's not what we don't know that hurts us, it's what we know for sure that just ain't so." O Mark Twain "It is not what we don't know that is the problem, it is what we know that is wrong that gets us in trouble. -Samuel Clemens (aka Mark Twain) "It isn't what we don't know that gives us trouble, it's what we know that ain't so." -- attributed to Will Rogers (from NewsScan Daily, 18 Jan 2000). Then in NewsScan Daily, 20 Jan, we find this: "The quote "The trouble with people is not that they don't know but that they know so much that ain't so." actually originated not with Will Rogers but with Josh Billings (1818-1885; his real name was Henry Wheeler Shaw); there is a good discussion of the misattribution of this quote in Ralph Keyes' excellent "Nice Guys Finish Seventh." (Michael Cook)" Tom Walker
[PEN-L:7613] Racism and Humor
I have been accused on these lists of being at times unduly sensitive to racist remarks and attitudes, and in fact of being guilty of reverse racist offenses. If I am guilty of that, and it may well be so, a question can be put as why I, an otherwise reasonable person, should be so excessively sensitive on this issue. The answer may be that I live in America, a society in which racism is rampant and pervasive and in fact structural to its very core. Perceptions are conditioned by past experience. Anticipatory expectation is reflexive. When one see a paper-marche version of a solid brick throw at one's head, one ducks. So when members of racial and ethnic minorities are hyper-sensitive about racist remarks, attitudes or intentions, they are not merely being duly paranoid, they are being reasonably self protective based on direct personal experience and Lamarkian conditioning. It is oppressive to argue that a specific remark or action is technically benign and that the reative sensitivity itself is racist, rather than acknowledging the collective quilt of a pervasive social regime that give concrete meaning to that very sensitivity. It is the syndrome of blaming the victim rather than the crime. Racism is so pervasive in American society that only the blatantly racist acts are recognized. Much racism is accepted in America as normal and racial or ethnic profiling is generally considered as common sense. Third World ambassadors have routinely been mistakenly redirected to the employee entrance on their way to exclusive dinners at fancy restaurants and private clubs (it would be funny if a black temporary employee is mistakenly directed to the guest entrance), while a black person driving an expensive car must be a car thieve or a drug dealer or both. Chinese rhetoric is more readily ridiculed than Soviet rhetoric and appeared funnier to Americans. Of course, this cannot be racism, but please tell me what it is. In many cultures, humors involves realizing a senseless situation or one's own senseless errors. American culture places humor more directly at the expense of the victim. One can see this in American cartoons where violence and victimization are the main sources of humor. America also has an admirable tradition of standing up for the underdog. In one Western cowboy movie, I remember a scene in which John Wayne defended the Chinese laundryman by declaring: "Don't pick on the Chinaman!" The same term was used publicly by President Truman in defending civil liberty during the McCarthy era when he said on television about those being investigated as "not having a Chinaman's chance". Frnk Sinatra, who was very active on the Anti-infamitory League, testified in a televised Congressional hearing about his alleged ties to organized crime that he routinely had his picture taken at casinos with would be gansters and "Chinamen" from Hong Kong. Only a few months ago, the American Ambassador to the UN, Richardson, used the term "Chinaman" in public, for which he later apologised in a public statement explaining he did not realize the term as being offensive to Chinese people. That apology hurts more than the term itself. And Richarson is of Mexican descent. Of course, no culture is perfect. But very few other than America goes around the globe setting itself up as the standard of decent behavior. Henry C.K. Liu
[PEN-L:7587] humor
Ha ha. Marxism jokes. How funny. And topical too! Those Marxists, riding high so full of themselves - fat, neglected targets! Doug
[PEN-L:6209] Re: RE: humor and sensitivity
Max Sawicky wrote: I've gotten worse from HCKL in the past and didn't complain, but I'm not gonna bother him any more; he takes the fun out of it. Give an example or evidence what you got from me in the past that justifies your making fun of my name. BTW, if you had pronounced my name LIU properly, you silly pun would not have worked. The name is not LU, it is LIU, accent of the i, as in li-u. It is a very famous name in China. It belongs not just to me personally but to my family the history for which traces back to the 7th century. Anyone slightly familiar with Chinese history would recognized the name and know its proper pronounciation. Your idea of fun is offensive. HCKL
[PEN-L:6207] RE: humor and sensitivity
Henry made a useful point. Get a K Liu is clever, but it can also be insulting. I've gotten worse from HCKL in the past and didn't complain, but I'm not gonna bother him any more; he takes the fun out of it. And Hoover called me icky. Get it? Icky Sawicky. Big guys have feelings too. mbs Some people come on the list blasting away, shooting from the hip. Louis P. is an example. I hope that it is fair to say that although his politics are serious, his demeanor is playful and he is thick skinned enough to take ribbing. Others are more easily insulted. We need more attention to such matters. We should also be careful about attributing views to others.
[PEN-L:6149] humor
Tom Kruse's informative note on humor reminds us that we have to keep the context in mind. One question: Wasn't the Bolivian meeting a public meeting, designed to boost morale while the Nicaraguan exchanges were private? I am reminded of the different attitudes towards funerals. Sometimes, we laugh about the good times [and cry privately]; sometimes we are somber. -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[PEN-L:6167] Humor, Tragedy, and Pious Platitudes (was A note of thanks to all)
Tom Kruse wrote: On the other hand, I find that in academic-ish US culture (like this list) humor is ubiquitous and often quite healthy. Yet sometimes, upon returning to the US -- or just downloading email -- I am sometimes blown away by how horrific events can be addressed in a humorous mode; I guess I'm not used to it anymore. But I see this more as a reflection of the (cultrally sepcific) discursive currency in ciruculation, and not a problem of morally irresponsible speakers. I'm also struck by the disappearance of tragedy (or the tragic mode of representation) in American culture in general (of which acadmic-ish US culture is a small part). I don't consider this disappearance to be healthy, though. What I think is a relentless insistence upon humor and entertainment, when combined with the exclusion of the tragic mode + the profusion of pious platitudes (as in most commonly heard responses to Littleton, for instance), points to the impoverishment of culture: a narrowing-down of what we are allowed to express (without being considered weird), an enforcement of superficial toughness (e.g. "we can laugh at anything--even the destruction of our own lives"), and finally an appearance of 'social harmony' when real solidarity doesn't exist and only competition prevails. Yoshie
[PEN-L:6194] humor and sensitivity
Henry made a useful point. Get a K Liu is clever, but it can also be insulting. Some people come on the list blasting away, shooting from the hip. Louis P. is an example. I hope that it is fair to say that although his politics are serious, his demeanor is playful and he is thick skinned enough to take ribbing. Others are more easily insulted. We need more attention to such matters. We should also be careful about attributing views to others. -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University [EMAIL PROTECTED] Chico, CA 95929 530-898-5321 fax 530-898-5901
[PEN-L:12202] Re: Dark humor posted to Chinese Christian Newsgroup
I first heard this story during the Iraq-Iran War when the Iranians were reported to be using soldiers to clear land mines by just marching through the fields. Then it was a flat out joke: Ali sees Mohammed walking ten feet behind his wife and says "Mohammed, don't you know that according to the Koran your wife should be walking ten feet behind YOU?" And Mohammed replies: "Ah, yes. But that was before land mines." My guess is that the story originated in that period and circulated as part of the then rabid anti-Islamic humor/ideology that flowered during the post-1978 hostage conflict. On Mon, 8 Sep 1997, Michael Eisenscher wrote: A journalist had done a story on gender roles in Kuwait several years before the Gulf War, and she noted then that women customarily walked about 10 feet behind their husbands. She returned to Kuwait recently and observed that the men now walked several yards behind their wives. She approached one of the women for an explanation.. "This is marvelous," said the journalist. "What enabled women here to achieve this reversal of roles?" Replied the Kuwaiti woman: "Land mines" Harry Cleaver Department of Economics University of Texas at Austin Austin, Texas 78712-1173 USA Phone Numbers: (hm) (512) 478-8427 (off) (512) 475-8535 Fax:(512) 471-3510 E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cleaver homepage: http://www.eco.utexas.edu/faculty/Cleaver/index.html Chiapas95 homepage: http://www.eco.utexas.edu/faculty/Cleaver/chiapas95.html Accion Zapatista homepage: http://www.utexas.edu/students/nave/
[PEN-L:12195] Dark humor posted to Chinese Christian Newsgroup
A journalist had done a story on gender roles in Kuwait several years before the Gulf War, and she noted then that women customarily walked about 10 feet behind their husbands. She returned to Kuwait recently and observed that the men now walked several yards behind their wives. She approached one of the women for an explanation. "This is marvelous," said the journalist. "What enabled women here to achieve this reversal of roles?" Replied the Kuwaiti woman: "Land mines"
[PEN-L:11415] FW: Humor: syntax and irony
Subject: "signs of the times" The following are actual signs seen across the good ol' U.S.A. At gas eateries through the nation: Eat here and get gas. At a Santa Fe gas station: We will sell gasoline to anyone in a glass container. In a New York restaurant: Customers who consider our waitresses uncivil ought to see the manager. On the wall of a Baltimore estate: Trespassers will be prosecuted to the full extent of the law. --Sisters of Mercy On a long-established New Mexico dry cleaners: 38 years on the same spot. In a Los Angeles dance hall: Good clean dancing every night but Sunday. In a Florida maternity ward: No children allowed. In a New York drugstore: We dispense with accuracy On a New Hampshire medical building: Martin Diabetes Professional Ass. In the offices of a loan company: Ask about our plans for owning your home. In a New York medical building: Mental Health Prevention Center On a New York convalescent home: For the sick and tired of the Episcopal Church. On a Maine shop: Our motto is to give our customers the lowest possible prices and workmanship. At a number of military bases: Restricted to unauthorized personnel. On a display of "I love you only" valentine cards: Now available in multi-packs. In the window of a Kentucky appliance store: Don't kill your wife. Let our washing machine do the dirty work. In a funeral parlor: Ask about our layaway plan. In a clothing store: Wonderful bargains for men with 16 and 17 necks. In a Tacoma, Washington men's clothing store: 15 men's wool suits, $10. They won't last an hour! On a shopping mall marquee: Archery Tournament -- Ears pierced Outside a country shop: We buy junk and sell antiques. In the window of an Oregon store: Why go elsewhere and be cheated when you can come here? In a Maine restaurant: Open 7 days a week and weekends. On a radiator repair garage: Best place to take a leak. In the vestry of a New England church: Will the last person to leave please see that the perpetual light is extinguished. In a Pennsylvania cemetery: Persons are prohibited from picking flowers from any but their own graves. On a roller coaster: Watch your head. On the grounds of a public school: No tresspassing without permission. On a Tennessee highway: When this sign is under water, this road is impassable. Similarly, in front of a New Hampshire car wash: If you can't read this, it's time to wash your car. And apparently, somewhere in England in an open field otherwise untouched by human presence, there is a sign that says "Do not throw stones at this sign." *--* * James Craven * " The philosophers have only * * Dept of Economics* interpreted the world in various * * Clark College* ways; the point, however, is to * * 1800 E. Mc Loughlin Blvd.* change it." (Karl Marx) * * Vancouver, Wa. 98663 * * * (360) 992-2283 * * * [EMAIL PROTECTED]* * * MY EMPLOYER HAS NO ASSOCIATION WITH MY PRIVATE/PROTECTED OPINION *
[PEN-L:9768] Essentialist humor
A panda walks into a restaurant, sits down, and orders a sandwich. After finishing the sandwich, the panda pulls out a gun and shoots the waiter dead. As the panda stands up to leave, the mangers shouts, "Hey! Where are you going? You just shot my waiter and you did not pay your bill!" The panda yells back to the restaurant manager, "Hey buddy, I'm a panda! Look it up!" And walks out. Nonplussed, the manager opens his dictionary and finds the following definition: Panda: A tree dwelling mammal of Asian origin, characterised by distinct black and white coloring. Eats shoots and leaves. wojtek sokolowski institute for policy studies johns hopkins university baltimore, md 21218 [EMAIL PROTECTED] voice: (410) 516-4056 fax: (410) 516-8233 ** REDUCE MENTAL POLLUTION - LOBOTOMIZE PUNDITS! ** +--+ |There is no such thing as society, only the individuals | |who constitute it. -Margaret Thatcher | | | | | |There is no such thing as government or corporations,| |only the individuals who lust for power and money.| | -no apologies to Margaret Thatcher | +--+ *DROGI KURWA BUDUJA, A NIE MA DOKAD ISC
[PEN-L:9768] Essentialist humor
A panda walks into a restaurant, sits down, and orders a sandwich. After finishing the sandwich, the panda pulls out a gun and shoots the waiter dead. As the panda stands up to leave, the mangers shouts, "Hey! Where are you going? You just shot my waiter and you did not pay your bill!" The panda yells back to the restaurant manager, "Hey buddy, I'm a panda! Look it up!" And walks out. Nonplussed, the manager opens his dictionary and finds the following definition: Panda: A tree dwelling mammal of Asian origin, characterised by distinct black and white coloring. Eats shoots and leaves. wojtek sokolowski institute for policy studies johns hopkins university baltimore, md 21218 [EMAIL PROTECTED] voice: (410) 516-4056 fax: (410) 516-8233 ** REDUCE MENTAL POLLUTION - LOBOTOMIZE PUNDITS! ** +--+ |There is no such thing as society, only the individuals | |who constitute it. -Margaret Thatcher | | | | | |There is no such thing as government or corporations,| |only the individuals who lust for power and money.| | -no apologies to Margaret Thatcher | +--+ *DROGI KURWA BUDUJA, A NIE MA DOKAD ISC
[PEN-L:9620] Internet Humor
I hope you'll appreciate this: Posted on 14 Dec 1996 at 23:45:10 by TELEC List Distributor (011802) FW: Christmas restructuring... Date: Sat, 14 Dec 1996 23:45:05 -0500 Reply-To: URI Faculty Senate List [EMAIL PROTECTED] From: David Nelson [EMAIL PROTECTED] 'Tis the season The recent announcement that Donner and Blitzen have elected to take the early reindeer retirement package has triggered a good deal of concern about whether they will be replaced, and about other restructuring decisions at the North Pole. Streamlining is due to the North Pole's loss of dominance of the season's gift distribution business. Home shopping channels and mail order catalogues have diminished Santa's market share. He could not sit idly by and permit further erosion of the profit picture. The reindeer downsizing was made possible through the purchase of a late model Japanese sled for the CEO's annual trip. Improved productivity from Dasher and Dancer, who summered at the Harvard Business School, is anticipated. Reduction in reindeer will also lessen airborne environmental emissions for which the North Pole has received unfavorable press. I am pleased to inform you that Rudolph's role will not be disturbed. Tradition still counts for something at the North Pole. Management denies, in the strongest possible language, the earlier leak that Rudolph's nose got that way, not from the cold, but from substance abuse. Calling Rudolph "a lush who was into the sauce and never did pull his share of the load" was an unfortunate comment, made by one of Santa's helpers and taken out of context at a time of year when he is known to be under executive stress. As a further restructuring, today's global challenges require the North Pole to continue to look for better, more competitive steps. Effective immediately, the following economy measures are to take place in the "Twelve Days of Christmas" subsidiary: - The partridge will be retained, but the pear tree never turned out to be the cash crop forecasted. It will be replaced by a plastic hanging plant, providing considerable savings in maintenance; - The two turtle doves represent a redundancy that is simply not cost effective. In addition, their romance during working hours could not be condoned. The positions are therefore eliminated; - The three French hens will remain intact. After all, everyone loves the French; - The four calling birds were replaced by an automated voice mail system, with a call waiting option. An analysis is underway to determine who the birds have been calling, how often and how long they talked; - The five golden rings have been put on hold by the Board of Directors. Maintaining a portfolio based on one commodity could have negative implications for institutional investors. Diversification into other precious metals as well as a mix of T-Bills and high technology stocks appear to be in order; - The six geese-a-laying constitutes a luxury which can no longer be afforded. It has long been felt that the production rate of one egg per goose per day is an example of the decline in productivity. Three geese will be let go, and an upgrading in the selection procedure by personnel will assure management that from now on every goose it gets will be a good one; - The seven swans-a-swimming is obviously a number chosen in better times. The function is primarily decorative. Mechanical swans are on order. The current swans will be retrained to learn some new strokes and therefore enhance their outplacement; - As you know, the eight maids-a-milking concept has been under heavy scrutiny by the EEOC. A male/female balance in the workforce is being sought. The more militant maids consider this a dead-end job with no upward mobility. Automation of the process may permit the maids to try a-mending, a-mentoring or a-mulching; - Nine ladies dancing has always been an odd number. This function will be phased out as these individuals grow older and can no longer do the steps; - Ten Lords-a-leaping is overkill. The high cost of Lords plus the expense of international air travel prompted the Compensation Committee to suggest replacing this group with ten out-of-work congressmen. While leaping ability may be somewhat sacrificed, the savings are significant because we expect an oversupply of unemployed congressmen this year; - Eleven pipers piping and twelve drummers drumming is a simple case of the band getting too big. A substitution with a string quartet, a cutback on new music and no uniforms will produce savings which will drop right down to the bottom line; We can expect a substantial reduction in assorted people, fowl, animals and other expenses. Though
[PEN-L:7466] Re: A little humor
What did the elephant say to the naked man? "How do you eat with that thing?" maggie coleman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[PEN-L:7425] A little humor
Two economists (one a Chicago School devotee of Uncle Miltie and one A Rational Expectationist) were walking down the road and came across a pile of shit. The Chicago School devotee of Miltie offered the Rational Expectationist $20,000 to eat the shit. After a quick optimization calculation, the Rational Expectationist ate it. Later, down the road they came across another pile of excrement and the Rational Expectationist in turn offered the Friedmanite $20,000 to eat it and after a quick optimization calculation he ate it. As they were walking down the road the rational expectationist said to the Friedmanite: "You know, we just screwed up; we are actually worse off because we each have $20,000 with no net change from our original cash position plus we have both eaten shit. The Friedmanite looked mockingly at the Rational Expectationist and said: "it is obvious that you never studied economics at a school of the stature of Chicago. You have completely ignored the fact that we have just generated $40,000 worth of trade." Jim Craven *--* * James Craven * "The envelope is only defined--and * * Dept of Economics* expanded--by the test pilot who dares* * Clark College* to push it." * * 1800 E. McLoughlin Blvd. * (H.H. Craven Jr.(a gifted pilot) * * Vancouver, Wa. 98663 * * * (360) 992-2283 * "For those who have fought for it, * * [EMAIL PROTECTED] * freedom has a taste the protected* * * will never know." (Otto Von Bismark) * * * * * MY EMPLOYER HAS NO ASSOCIATION WITH MY PRIVATE/PROTECTED OPINION *
[PEN-L:6776] Re: humor
(y)M*W=(y)D M=money W=work D=debt y=percentage of income spent on consumption If one cancels the y out, then all the money earned at work goes to debt. If one does not work, one does not incur debt. (HA) maggie coleman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[PEN-L:6779] Re: humor
Treacy: And then we have: Summation sign IOU'S=Summation sign UOME'S If you both sides of the equation by O and U you are left with: Summation sign I's=Summation sign ME's [EMAIL PROTECTED] copyrighted On Sat, 19 Oct 1996 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: (y)M*W=(y)D M=money W=work D=debt y=percentage of income spent on consumption If one cancels the y out, then all the money earned at work goes to debt. If one does not work, one does not incur debt. (HA) maggie coleman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[PEN-L:6717] humor
ss Money You Make. Solving for Money, we get: M = W/K (6) Money equals Work Over Knowledge. From equation (6) we see that Money approaches infinity as Knowledge approaches 0, regardless of the Work done. What THIS MEANS is: The More you Make, the Less you Know. Solving for Work, we get W = M x K (7) Work equals Money times Knowledge From equation (7) we see that Work approaches 0 as Knowledge approaches 0. What THIS MEANS is: The stupid rich do little or no work. Working out the socioeconomic implications of this breakthrough is left as an exercise for the reader. Does Fuzzy Logic Tickle? -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 916-898-5321 E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[PEN-L:5095] Re: Libertarians, suicide, and humor
First on Jim Craven's apologies: Don't bend over backwards, Jim. I enjoyed your tirade immensely. Right on! Secondly: It should be a consolation that libertarianism f.inst. in Europe is a non-significant phenomenon (does it have any punch ANYWHERE outside the U.S.?). Market liberalism, yes, but not the crackpot U.S. "libertarianism". Here in Norway the stably tiny group that professes to be libertarians consists of a few young, yuppie- or nerdiness-projecting conservatives with zero popular appeal. But even those are social democrats compared to the uebermenschy gun-toting heinleinian U.S. type. Trond Andresen ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) | phone (work) +47 7359 4358 Department of Engineering Cybernetics | fax (work) +47 7359 4399 Norwegian University of Science and Technology| private ph. +47 7353 0823 N-7034 Trondheim, NORWAY | cellular ph. +47 9016 6930 http://www.itk.unit.no/ansatte/Andresen_Trond __
[PEN-L:5065] Libertarians, suicide, and humor
James Michael Craven 7/10 joins PR Burns (in the misty past) in mistaking me for a Libertarian, using the broad and enthusiastically-wielded brush of his lengthy psychoanalytic foray (some of which actually described many of the libertarians I've known), joined to increasingly-frothing demonstration that libertarians are just not as nice as, well, Craven demonstrates himself to be in that very paragraph. (I'm not saying that the descriptions aren't more or less accurate, though perhaps intemperately phrased. There are a lot of libertarian geeks out there, and their atomistic individualism, if not monadism, expresses itself both personally and ideologically. Isn't it lucky that Radical Economists, if there be any with character flaws, are so idiosyncratic that no outsider could descry a parallel -- well, I wouldn't exactly call it "pathology"? That way, the dreaded/despised libertarians can be dismissed as being as geeky as their ideas -- sparing the need to look very closely at either -- but one can still espouse ideas borrowed from a like-minded but, well, odd comrade? What I'm pointing to is the sort of thing that used to be covered under "ad hominem" in the rhetoric texts.) Just wondering -- if a peneller's wife killed herself, would it be fair to attribute her actions, and the antecedent distress, to the peneller's ideas? Would it be acceptable, as "badinage," to make jocular remarks to that effect on this list? Or would the members' sense of decorum extend at least to protect themselves? What sort of _community_ does this list constitute? Michael Etchison [opinions mine, not the PUCT's]
[PEN-L:5073] Re: Libertarians, suicide, and humor
I don't believe I ever accused Mr Etchison of being a libertarian. I asked him to read and respond to some posts of mine critiquing libertarianism. I may have accused him of being driven by a pro-market ideology (though not libertarianism specifically), and I think this is a fair charge on the evidence of his contributions to this list Oh, and BTW, my name is not PR Burns. I do answer to R. P. Burns, Fr Burns, or Fr R. P. Burns, but I prefer to use my second name "Peter" only, as this is what I have always been called in my family circle. __ Reply Separator _ Subject: [PEN-L:5065] Libertarians, suicide, and humor Author: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (GC-Etchison; Michael) at SMTPLINK-LMU Date:7/10/96 1:18 PM James Michael Craven 7/10 joins PR Burns (in the misty past) in mistaking me for a Libertarian, using the broad and
[PEN-L:1692] Sick humor from the National Institute for Business Management
I just received a quite incredible caricature of "Employer Rights" groups through the mail, seeking to promote their document "Fire At Will". A couple of quotes: "At the Institute we're on your side. We think you owe it to yourself and your company to learn how to tell whomever you want, whenever you want, "YOU'RE FIRED!" (emphasis in original!) "Partial contents: How _not_ to lose your right to hire and fire at will - and how to get it back if you _have_ lost it... What you can and cannot do with workers' medical records... What you don't have to do for pregnant workers... How to make and break oral contracts... How to derail age, race and sex discrimination charges before they can get started..." Who are these people? Rich Parkin, Economics Dept., 400 Wickenden Building, 10,900 Euclid Ave., Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH 44106-7206 (216) 368-4294 (w)
[PEN-L:5264] more geek humor
please hit the delete key immediately...naturally, as the PC guy i am, i
deleted the obligatory naughty bits...
From: Pat McGraw mcgraw
Subject: UNIX is a joke
These are some things that many Unix operating systems will print in
response to various commands. What the user has typed has a "% " in
front of it:
---
% cat "food in cans"
cat: can't open food in cans
% rm God
rm: God nonexistent
% ar t God
ar: God does not exist]
% ar r God
ar: creating God
% "How would you rate Quayle's incompetence?
Unmatched ".
% [Where is Jimmy Hoffa?
Missing ].
% If I had a ( for every $ the Congress spent, what
would I have?
Too many ('s.
% make love
Make: Don't know how to make love. Stop.
% got a light?
No match.
% man: why did you get a divorce?
man:: Too many arguments.
% !:say, what is saccharine?
Bad substitute.
/* not csh but sh */
$ PATH=pretending!/usr/ucb/which sense
no sense in pretending!
$ drink bottle; opener
bottle: cannot open
opener: not found
http://www.wri.com:80/~naiman/
[PEN-L:4999] humor
PROGRAM PATTERNS SOCIETAL EVOLUTION Researchers at the Brookings Institution have developed a computer program that generates artificial societies and tracks how they evolve over time. The Computerrarium program uses a "bottom up" approach, in which elaborate structures emerge from the collective interaction of as many as 1,000 "individuals" following a few very simple rules. Each individual has a unique set of characteristics (randomly assigned at the outset), both fixed and variable. The program is still under development but the two researchers have already found that their digital people behave more like real humans than the consumers depicted in most economic textbooks: "If we make the agents less like Homo economicus and more like Homo sapiens -- that is, relax these very stringent assumptions -- important laissez-faire assumptions (of standard economic theory) do not hold up very well." (Tampa Tribune 5/5/95 BayLife 3) -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 916-898-5321 E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[PEN-L:4355] humor
Pen-l has been pretty grim of late, so here goes. (WARNING: some will be offended, including maybe even my employers.) TOP TEN REASONS WHY BEER IS BETTER THAN JESUS 10. No one will kill you for not drinking Beer. 9. Beer doesn't tell you how to have sex. 8. Beer has never caused a major war. 7. They don't force Beer on minors who can't think for themselves. 6. When you have a Beer, you don't knock on people's doors trying to give it away. 5. Nobody's ever been burned at the stake, hanged, or tortured over his or her brand of Beer. 4. You don't have to wait 2000+ years for a second Beer. 3. There are laws saying tht Beer labels can't lie to you. 2. You can prove that there is a Beer. 1. If you've devoted your life to Beer, there are groups to help you stop. Appendix: some of us are still waiting for the first Beer. in pen-l solidarity, Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] or [EMAIL PROTECTED] Econ. Dept., Loyola Marymount Univ., Los Angeles, CA 90045-2699 USA 310/338-2948 (daytime, during workweek); FAX: 310/338-1950 "Segui il tuo corso, e lascia dir le genti." (Go your own way and let people talk.) -- K. Marx, paraphrasing Dante.
[PEN-L:3567] Re: query: humor
An economist is someone who talks in other people's sleep. Oh, and also a person with a flair for numbers who lacked the personality to be an accountant. But you probably knew that one. Doug Doug Henwood [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Left Business Observer 212-874-4020 (voice) 212-874-3137 (fax) On Fri, 30 Dec 1994, Charles Whalen wrote: I'm looking for (clean) jokes and one-liners about economics and economists -- would be interested in both individual contributions and info on any compilations that may exist. Charles Whalen Jerome Levy Economics Institute Bard College [[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
[PEN-L:3563] query: humor
I'm looking for (clean) jokes and one-liners about economics and economists -- would be interested in both individual contributions and info on any compilations that may exist. Charles Whalen Jerome Levy Economics Institute Bard College [[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
