> Dana wrote:
> hard to know where to start with this. I've already learned with you that
> it's pretty tough talking economics with someone who doesn't believe in
> economics
Yeah ... You've said a whole bunch about me, but not much at all about
the topic. Like I said, tell us of your Great Am
That is what the social safety net is for- helping decent people who just
got screwed for one reason or another.
On 5/24/06, G Money wrote:
>
>
> >
> You missed that (admittedly small) group of people who are poor because of
> extraordinary circumstances beyond their control...injury coupled w
hard to know where to start with this. I've already learned with you that it's
pretty tough talking economics with someone who doesn't believe in economics,
so I'll just mention that the kid's mother *did* have a job and let in go at
that. I have a proposal due.
>> Dana wrote:
>> Next time you'
> gMoney wrote:
> But there are times when good people just get
> screwed by life..
>
Yup, you're right.
One thing on this topic that shocks me though is how little people are
saving which puts them at risk for something like this.
For example, my wife and I don't have kids because we want t
On 5/24/06, Gruss Gott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> So tell me what I've missed.
>
>
You missed that (admittedly small) group of people who are poor because of
extraordinary circumstances beyond their control...injury coupled with
the death of a providerridiculous medical bills for the
> GG wrote:
> > Dana wrote:
> > Next time you're in San Antonio get out of the gated complex ;)
> >
>
Why people are poor in America in 2006:
(1.) Ignorance. Don't know how to get jobs, build careers,
strategize, research, study, etc. I fell into this category. Usually
this is anyone from a sm
> Dana wrote:
> Next time you're in San Antonio get out of the gated complex ;)
>
She says from her $1000 laptop on her high speed internet connection.
I didn't say there was no poverty, I said anyone willing to work can.
And yes, there are lots of people that just don't know how to get jobs
- h
I don't need to demonstrate it. It is being demonstrated every day across
the United States. The growth of the Indian IT sector is huge, and yet look
at the want ads for software people. There are large numbers of jobs
available right now, many more than there have been in any year since the
bubble
I'd really like to see you demonstrate this. It sounds good, but I don't think
it's correct.
>Take India. Everyone freaked out a a few years ago when they realized that
>massive amounts of IT and customer service jobs were being outsourced to
>India. Guess what? Those Indian companies are growing
pfft. This is what happens when they let b-school kids think they know
something ;)
Did I say unions were a good thing here now, today? I said that in the 19th
century they were they people who brought us the weekend and abolished the
company store. Neither of which you know about because you
> Dana wrote:
> please see the history of unionism in the 19th century,
Please see a history of unionism in the 21st century. Unions are
dead. Heard of the Northwest Airlines strike? Their mechanics union
is still on strike almost a year later and the airline is flying just
fine. Half of the w
Globalization rules!
How can anyone who has witnessed the last three decades not see the benefits
of globalization? Anyone here drive a foreign car? Anyone here buy clothes,
or shoes, or pretty much anything else made in a factory? How about a
computer? ;-) None of us would be able to afford the q
please see the history of unionism in the 19th century, followed by the advent
of the New Deal in the 20th. Both very big factors in the rise of the middle
class. Or read Dcken sometime. I know you said he was too hard, but you can do
it if you try ;)
>Then how can we all be employed? Yet we a
> Dana wrote:
> You miss the point again. The Industrial Revolution *was* a race to the
> bottom.
Then how can we all be employed? Yet we are and we work in neither
factories nor farms. And neither does most of America. And all
Americans are far wealthier than their counterparts 60 or 100 yea
You miss the point again. The Industrial Revolution *was* a race to the bottom.
In its wake many of the measures you so despise were enacted - the minimum wage
and child labor laws for example. I am being very serious when I suggest that
you need to enter the nineteenth century, as your economic
> Galt wrote:
> I have thought that I believe in a free market within our system and
> protectionist policies to prevent third world countries and nations like the
> PRC from effectively pricing us out of jobs.
>
This EXACT same debate happened in the late 1800s/early 1900s
regarding agrarian jobs
.
> -Original Message-
> From: Chesty Puller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, May 23, 2006 8:27 AM
> To: CF-Community
> Subject: Re: They don't all hate us
>
> How is it thast you miss the point EVERY TIME? Globalization is effective
> only when the laws a
mmunity"
Sent: Tuesday, May 23, 2006 9:02 AM
Subject: Re: They don't all hate us
> It's also unfair for the United States to alter or ignore laws when it
> feels like simply because it is the only super power in the world.
>
> Case in point being the breaking of e
It's also unfair for the United States to alter or ignore laws when it
feels like simply because it is the only super power in the world.
Case in point being the breaking of every trade treaty that the US has
signed with the WTO to prosecute people doing business with Antigua
over gambling website
the government never will.
- Matt
- Original Message -
From: "Gruss Gott" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "CF-Community"
Sent: Monday, May 22, 2006 8:50 PM
Subject: Re: They don't all hate us
>> Dana wrote:
>> what has it done for me or anyone else
> Dana wrote:
> what has it done for me or anyone else lately?
Have you purchased anything in the last 10 years? If so then you
benefited greatly from globalization. Bought a house? Then you
benefited more. Have a job or a business? Then you benefited.
Globalization is no different than a sm
I am not so sure that blind globalization is the answer though. It looks good
on Star Trek but really, what has it done for me or anyone else lately? As far
as I can tell nobody benefited from NAFTA but the multinationals. And the harm
it did elsewhare was worse I think, so it's a net negative.
> Dana wrote:
> I think that what you are persistently missing is that human capital is in
> fact capital. You can refuse to maintain it, sure... but it's a bit
> small-minded.
I totally agree. Where we differ is the big picture. For me the
gov't should provide the tools and education that any
I think that what you are persistently missing is that human capital is in fact
capital. You can refuse to maintain it, sure... but it's a bit small-minded. I
can decide that I don't think I should have to put oil in my car -- why should
I? But in the long run I will pay more that way if I want
> Sam wrote:
> What I'm saying is we'll help them cleanup and get training but
> after that they're on their own. Its kind of selfish to say they got
> what they deserved so let them rot.
>
Wow, dude, I think I agree with you here. It's for this reason that I
believe the gov't needs a totally rev
May 22, 2006 11:45 AM
> To: CF-Community
> Subject: Re: They don't all hate us
>
> > Galt wrote:
> > #1 Neoconservative
> > Bwah hahahahahahahahahahhahahaha
> >
>
> Holy crap, dude! :)
>
> So, are you a Bush fan or did it just work
I expect mine to arrive in my mailbox soon.
Zaphod Beeblebrox wrote:
> Stand strong fellow Aitha!
>
> P.S. The armbands finally arrived.
>
>
> On 5/22/06, Crow T. Robot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Word, Aitha.
>>
>> Zaphod Beeblebrox wrote:
>>> Ha, were just about political twins! I guess I
Stand strong fellow Aitha!
P.S. The armbands finally arrived.
On 5/22/06, Crow T. Robot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Word, Aitha.
>
> Zaphod Beeblebrox wrote:
> > Ha, were just about political twins! I guess I am radical..it's
> > only because this world is so f'ed up and it needs a big fix
I hear ya. But I think I would prefer more general questions. For instance, I
think it gets "liberal" from my opposition to school vouchers, which is an NEA
article of faith, when I actually oppose it because I think we all should be
responsible for the education of our own children. And it's no
Word, Aitha.
Zaphod Beeblebrox wrote:
> Ha, were just about political twins! I guess I am radical..it's
> only because this world is so f'ed up and it needs a big fix.
>
>
> #1Radical
> #2Liberal
> #3Third Way
> #4Left-libertarian
> #5Paleoconservative
> #6Neoconserv
Ha, were just about political twins! I guess I am radical..it's
only because this world is so f'ed up and it needs a big fix.
#1 Radical
#2 Liberal
#3 Third Way
#4 Left-libertarian
#5 Paleoconservative
#6 Neoconservative
#7 Libertarian
#8 Paleo-liberta
On 5/22/06, Gruss Gott wrote:
>
> Gruss: "it is fiscally liberal for the government to do it."
Fiscally liberal is to tell all the needy they have an endless free
ride. What I'm saying is we'll help them cleanup and get training but
after that they're on their own. Its kind of selfish to say they
> Galt wrote:
> #1 Neoconservative
> Bwah hahahahahahahahahahhahahaha
>
Holy crap, dude! :)
So, are you a Bush fan or did it just work out that way? I guess I'm
most curious about your social politics ... are you against Gay
marriage, legalized prostitution, etc? Are you a "gun nut", "t
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Friday, May 19, 2006 5:05 PM
> To: CF-Community
> Subject: Re: They don't all hate us
>
> I didn't realize he was conmsidered a neo-con.
>
> So in my search for what a neo-con really is I came across this test:
>
> http://www.s
> Sam wrote:
> As explained by Bush:
> "It is compassionate to actively help our citizens in need. It is
> conservative to insist on accountability and results."
>
Gruss: "it is fiscally liberal for the government to do it."
> You on the
> other hand are against helping the little guy but you're
oops, actually said Not Sure, High
>
> 2. Should immigration into the US be greatly reduced?
> NoMedium
>
> Not sure High
>
~|
Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:207225
Archives: http://www.houseoffusi
I'm finding this discussion interesting. But didn't you just say you're a
liberal? I am still looking over your questionnaire. I think there are some
cultural biases. I know the one posted a while back didn't like the fact that I
am in favor of bilingualism. In Quebec that's actually a pretty pa
A liberal is a person that
1. Thinks the government knows best what to do with your money so we
should all pay more taxes.
2. Thinks the US should cede control of the military to the UN. and
hates the military
3. Thinks it's more important to teach the joys of homosexuality and
pretend the natura
On 5/20/06, Gruss Gott wrote:
> My definition revolves around 3 principles that differ from
> traditional conservatives:
>
> 1.) Neo-Cons are "compassionate conservatives" meaning fiscal
> liberals. For example, under Bush non-defense discretionary spending
> is some of the highest non-war spendi
> We wrote:
> this is of no surprise to me, i dont think.
> #1 Liberal
I think it's interesting that Sam and I, who seem to be polar
opposites on social politics (whether it's the government's job to
define and enforce morality), were both 3rd Way first; he then leaned
NeoCon and I leaned lib
this is of no surprise to me, i dont think.
# Your Results: Your prediction for your #1 result: Liberal. Does that
match your actual #1 result below?
#1 Liberal
#2 Third Way
#3 Radical
#4 Neoconservative
#5 Conservative
#6 Centrist
#7 Left-libertarian
#8 Pa
I haven't answered this yet because I have been wondering what Third Way is.
Sounds like the Moonies or something ;) Seriously, there is material here for a
couple of conversations and I'll come back to this later when I have more time.
>Monday I'll have to check all the work I did today/yesterd
> Sam wrote:
> I'm still not sure what a neo-con is
My definition revolves around 3 principles that differ from
traditional conservatives:
1.) Neo-Cons are "compassionate conservatives" meaning fiscal
liberals. For example, under Bush non-defense discretionary spending
is some of the highest non
Monday I'll have to check all the work I did today/yesterday.
I just realized you could adjust the weight of the questions. First
time I didn't even notice the yellow boxes.
I'm still not sure what a neo-con is but I thought it was a liberal
that converted to conservatism. I was always a conservat
> Sam wrote:
> #1 Third Way
> #2 Liberal
> #3 Neoconservative
> #4 Centrist
> #5 Conservative
> #6 Radical
> #7 Libertarian
> #8 Left-libertarian
> #9 Paleo-libertarian
> #10 Paleoconservative
>
You'll be entertained by mine:
#1 Third Way
#2 Liberal
#3 Libertarian
#4 Left-li
I didn't realize he was conmsidered a neo-con.
So in my search for what a neo-con really is I came across this test:
http://www.selectsmart.com/FREE/select.php?client=zeron
And my score:
#1 Third Way
#2 Liberal
#3 Neoconservative
#4 Centrist
#5 Conservative
#6 Radical
#7 Libertarian
#8 Left-lib
> Dana wrote:
> Why would you think that Australia hates the US?
>
> > World would be a darker place if not for US: Austrian Prime Minister
Apparently not Australia, but Austria
~|
Message: http://www
How would you describe yourself? Maybe I was fooled by all the Rush Limbaugh
quotes ;)
> You folks really do think I'm a neo-con. That's pretty funny, I guess
> that makes it easier to dismiss me as a wacko then to actually
> address
> the points.
>
> I believe what Howard and I'm glad he has t
So you admit the entire world isn't against us :)
Yeah, I generally avoid all forms of absolutism. There very seldom is an "all"
to anything.
But, I do not believe we did the right thing in the right manner, and we are
suffering for it.
--
Ian Skinner
Web Programmer
BloodSource
ww
A lot of other countries have governments that recognize a clusterfuck when
they see one ;)
>Wrong, many countries have forces in Afghanistan; the number of countries
>still deployed to Iraq has gone down quite a bit, with the coalition of the
>willing becoming unwilling to do their part anymore.
So you admit the entire world isn't against us :)
On 5/19/06, Ian Skinner wrote:
> I thought the theme on this list was the entire world, especially Europe, is
> against America because of Bush
>
> There is a subtle difference between most and entire. And last time I looked
> at a globe, Austra
I agree with him.
We are the only super power, didn't anyone watch spider man?
With great power comes great responsibility.
> -Original Message-
> From: Sam [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Friday, May 19, 2006 3:16 PM
> To: CF-Community
> Subject: Re: They don&#x
t: Friday, May 19, 2006 3:07 PM
> To: CF-Community
> Subject: Re: They don't all hate us
>
> Australia has troops in both Afghanistan and Iraq. So many European
> counties. Isn't that the current loyalty test for the neo-con crowd?
>
> >Oops! I thought he was from
You folks really do think I'm a neo-con. That's pretty funny, I guess
that makes it easier to dismiss me as a wacko then to actually address
the points.
I believe what Howard and I'm glad he has the courage to say it, but I
guess now all the Australians will be labeled neo-con Bush loving
idiots t
Australia has troops in both Afghanistan and Iraq. So many European
counties. Isn't that the current loyalty test for the neo-con crowd?
>Oops! I thought he was from Austria :)
>
>
>On 5/19/06, Sam wrote:
>>
~|
Message: http:/
Oops! I thought he was from Austria :)
Not fast enough, already dinged you on that one.
--
Ian Skinner
Web Programmer
BloodSource
www.BloodSource.org
Sacramento, CA
-
| 1 | |
- Binary Soduko
| | |
-
"C code. C code run. Run code run. Please!"
- Cynt
I thought the theme on this list was the entire world, especially Europe, is
against America because of Bush
There is a subtle difference between most and entire. And last time I looked
at a globe, Australia was not quite in Europe.
--
Ian Skinner
Web Programmer
BloodSource
www.B
Oops! I thought he was from Austria :)
On 5/19/06, Sam wrote:
> I thought the theme on this list was the entire world, especially
> Europe, is against America because of Bush
>
> On 5/19/06, Dana Tierney wrote:
> > ?
> >
> > Why would you think that Australia hates the US?
> >
> > Dana
>
~~~
I thought the theme on this list was the entire world, especially
Europe, is against America because of Bush
On 5/19/06, Dana Tierney wrote:
> ?
>
> Why would you think that Australia hates the US?
>
> Dana
~|
Message: http://www
?
Why would you think that Australia hates the US?
Dana
> World would be a darker place if not for US: Austrian Prime Minister
> John Howard
>
> http://www.theage.com.
au/news/national/world>
-would-be-a-darker-place-if-not-for-us-howard/2006/05/18/1147545456364.
> html
> AKA
> http://tinyurl
60 matches
Mail list logo
