David wrote:
The problem is that there aren't enough jobs to
go around, so some people wind up in dangerous jobs. Did they
VOLUNTARILY choose those jobs? Technically, yes. But they didn't
have enough other choices for it to really be a free choice.
Of course what a snot nosed kid whose idea
That's really brilliant -- counter an ad hominem argument
with another one.
You got it! I was so afraid that would go over everyone's heads.
Now, there may be some irony intended in that. I'll assume
that ML is calculating enough to have planted the irony
intentionally,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That's really brilliant -- counter an ad hominem argument
with another one.
You got it! I was so afraid that would go over everyone's heads.
Now, there may be some irony intended in that. I'll assume
that ML is calculating enough to have
David Hobby, dodging and weaving, metaphorically speaking:
jobs. Did they VOLUNTARILY choose those jobs? Technically,
yes. But they didn't have enough other choices for it to
really be a free choice.
Metaphorically, I said it was gray. You simplified my
position to your choice of
On 26 Apr 2004, at 7:50 pm, Mike Lee wrote:
First, you don't have knowledge of what is optimal. Second, the market
doesn't ignore externalities. Externalities are created because of the
framework of property rights that is generated by the legal system in
which
the market operates. If you want to
William T Goodall, noticing the obvious:
Wouldn't reforming the legal system and property rights be
something the government does?
Yes.
I guess your point is (I shudder to speak for you, but must do so because
you didn't speak for yourself, but at least I'll probably speak for you
better
Mike Lee wrote:
David Hobby thinks I've mischaracterized his position:
David Hobby thinks that workers are coerced into taking
dangerous jobs
and that government can make us all safe:
Mike-- If you mischaracterize my position, I won't discuss
things with you. Basta.
I'll
On Thu, Apr 22, 2004 at 08:22:39PM -0500, Robert Seeberger wrote:
Not very sensitive to how his messages will be received is he?
On the contrary!
--
Erik Reuter http://www.erikreuter.net/
___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
From: Dan Minette [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Original Message -
From: Mike Lee [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: 'Killer Bs Discussion' [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, April 22, 2004 4:50 PM
Subject: RE: This time I won't blame Bush
David Hobby thinks that workers are coerced into taking
Robert defends the virtue of St. Julia:
Wow!
Going after the most consistently inoffensive person on this list with
an insult.
Not just that, But Julia is the heart and soul of this little
community.
I bet you spend your Tuesday nights repeatedly dialing the American
Idol phone lines and
David Hobby thinks I've mischaracterized his position:
David Hobby thinks that workers are coerced into taking
dangerous jobs
and that government can make us all safe:
Mike-- If you mischaracterize my position, I won't discuss
things with you. Basta.
I'll address both of my
Andrew, probably not meaning what I think he means:
Nicely put Dan. It would seem the most enery efficent too,
and the most sensible. From all angles, except perhaps that
of the delusional paranoids trying to hang onto power in a
changing world.
Nice description of the New York Times
Julia, in snottier-than-thou mode:
That's really brilliant -- counter an ad hominem argument
with another one.
You got it! I was so afraid that would go over everyone's heads.
Now, there may be some irony intended in that. I'll assume
that ML is calculating enough to have planted the
David Hobby thinks that workers are coerced into taking dangerous jobs and
that government can make us all safe:
That's a great laissez-faire argument, which I might even
accept if unemployment were sufficiently low that it was
clear that employees had some other options.
Are you really
- Original Message -
From: Mike Lee [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: 'Killer Bs Discussion' [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, April 22, 2004 4:50 PM
Subject: RE: This time I won't blame Bush
David Hobby thinks that workers are coerced into taking dangerous jobs
and
that government can make us
- Original Message -
From: Mike Lee [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: 'Killer Bs Discussion' [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, April 22, 2004 4:50 PM
Subject: RE: This time I won't blame Bush
Julia, in snottier-than-thou mode:
That's really brilliant -- counter an ad hominem argument
On Thu, Apr 22, 2004 at 06:25:43PM -0500, Robert Seeberger wrote:
You don't have a BOZO in your job title do you? (An obscure reference
you won't get unless you actually do have BOZO in your job title)
Wrong wringer.
--
Erik Reuter http://www.erikreuter.net/
- Original Message -
From: Erik Reuter [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, April 22, 2004 7:30 PM
Subject: Re: This time I won't blame Bush
On Thu, Apr 22, 2004 at 06:25:43PM -0500, Robert Seeberger wrote:
You don't have a BOZO in your job
On Thu, Apr 22, 2004 at 07:40:58PM -0500, Robert Seeberger wrote:
That's how I figure it. But do we have a ringer?
Yes, but this one is harmless and doesn't need to be out'ed.
--
Erik Reuter http://www.erikreuter.net/
___
- Original Message -
From: Erik Reuter [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, April 22, 2004 8:07 PM
Subject: Re: This time I won't blame Bush
On Thu, Apr 22, 2004 at 07:40:58PM -0500, Robert Seeberger wrote:
That's how I figure it. But do we
Mike Lee wrote:
David Hobby thinks that workers are coerced into taking dangerous jobs and
that government can make us all safe:
Mike-- If you mischaracterize my position, I won't discuss things
with you. Basta.
That's a great laissez-faire argument, which I might even
accept if
Mike Lee wrote:
What about workers who put profit over their own lives?
Huh?
Your assumption is that employers are adults and employees are stupid
children unable or unwilling to look out for their own best interests.
There may be cases where hidden hazards cannot be perceived by
What about workers who put profit over their own lives?
Huh?
--
Tom Beck
my LiveJournal: http://www.livejournal.com/users/tomfodw/
I always knew I'd see the first man on the Moon. I never thought I'd
see the
At 07:43 AM 4/19/04, Thomas Beck wrote:
What about workers who put profit over their own lives?
Huh?
Such as anyone employed in a risky profession, e.g., coal mining, test
pilot, working for Haliburton in Iraq . . .
-- Ronn! :)
___
Such as anyone employed in a risky profession, e.g., coal mining, test
pilot, working for Haliburton in Iraq . . .
That's their personal choice to put themselves in harm's way. People
working for a company that deliberately subjects them to danger - only
a jerk would argue that it's their
What about workers who put profit over their own lives?
Huh?
Your assumption is that employers are adults and employees are stupid
children unable or unwilling to look out for their own best interests.
There may be cases where hidden hazards cannot be perceived by employees,
but these
- Original Message -
From: Mike Lee [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: 'Killer Bs Discussion' [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, April 19, 2004 4:06 PM
Subject: RE: This time I won't blame Bush
What about workers who put profit over their own lives?
From this sentence, it is not clear what you
only a jerk would argue that it's their personal choice to work in
hazardous conditions.
Only a liberal idiot would think an ad hominem argument like that answers
anything.
___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Mike Lee wrote:
What about workers who put profit over their own lives?
Huh?
Your assumption is that employers are adults and employees are stupid
children unable or unwilling to look out for their own best interests.
There may be cases where hidden hazards cannot be perceived by
Mike Lee wrote:
only a jerk would argue that it's their personal choice to work in
hazardous conditions.
Only a liberal idiot would think an ad hominem argument like that answers
anything.
That's really brilliant -- counter an ad hominem argument with another
one.
Scratch brilliant, I
Tom Beck, certain that only capitalists have moral responsibility for
everything that happens:
The problem is not just OSHA, of course, but companies that
put profit over life.
What about workers who put profit over their own lives?
___
As someone who lives and breathes OSHA and MiOSHA all day long, that
case
made me very angry. I am in charge of buying large stamping presses
and
safety is something that I plan from the beginning of any project.
The sad
thing about OSHA is that they only go where the money is. Since I
Tom Beck wrote:
The New York Times deservedly won the Pulitzer Prize for public service
journalism for its series Dangerous Business about companies
deliberately endangering workers' lives.
http://www.nytimes.com/ref/national/WORK_INDEX.html
Damn. Reminded me a bit of Upton Sinclair's
Damn. Reminded me a bit of Upton Sinclair's _The Jungle_ in some ways.
The story about the young man who drowned in mud had me almost shaking
with rage. The fact that literally nothing was done to punish the woman
who owns the company that employed him - how can _anyone_ not feel
On 4/9/04 12:29 AM, Tom Beck [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The story about the young man who drowned in mud had me almost shaking
with rage. The fact that literally nothing was done to punish the woman
who owns the company that employed him - how can _anyone_ not feel
infuriated by the lack of
The New York Times deservedly won the Pulitzer Prize for public service
journalism for its series Dangerous Business about companies
deliberately endangering workers' lives.
http://www.nytimes.com/ref/national/WORK_INDEX.html
36 matches
Mail list logo
