Curt Howland wrote:
Not only has the system never been profitable since, ridership
continues to drop since the just-pre-buyout peak around 1940.
Wait, wait, wasn't this system an example of one that worked? Hehe...
hehe... *snerk* Gotta remember that.
--
Steve C. Lamb
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Fri, 2 Jun 2006 14:32:27 -0700
Paul Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Friday 02 June 2006 13:11, Steve Lamb wrote:
Paul Johnson wrote:
If good ideas did spread, sales tax would be unconstitutional in
more than Oregon and New Hampshire,
Jacob S wrote:
I know of a large metroplex where the only public transportation gets
tax money. The business talked the cities into adding a full
percentage point to their sales tax to help fund the bus line. And yes,
they're still worlds slower than driving your own car.
I seem to
Paul Johnson wrote:
Good luck. It's about 330 miles from the first gas station in Washington to
the first gas station in California on I-5, the shortest way to make the
trip.
330 miles, like that's a long distance. Maybe I'll go back and forth for
an entire week, just for you.
It's
On Sat, Jun 03, 2006 at 09:34:16AM -0700, Steve Lamb wrote:
Paul Johnson wrote:
The US is a federation of 50 individual states that really don't owe each
other much of anything. California forgets this most often.
Doesn't matter. Because at the end the states contain people and
On Sat, Jun 03, 2006 at 08:26:58AM -0500, Jacob S wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Fri, 2 Jun 2006 14:32:27 -0700
Paul Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Friday 02 June 2006 13:11, Steve Lamb wrote:
Paul Johnson wrote:
If good ideas did spread, sales tax
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Saturday 03 June 2006 15:03, Jacob S [EMAIL PROTECTED] was
heard to say:
They were having such a riot, they talked the city governments into
giving them even more money to start a rail line. It's faster than
the bus, but only if you want to go
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Saturday 03 June 2006 15:03, Christopher Nelson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
was heard to say:
Politics is one thing--but now you're attacking economics? Now
that's low ;)
That's funny. Politics is a neverending attack against economics.
- --
September
Stephen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Heck even some republics have a figure head of state, France for example
has a Prime Minister and a President. If memory serves, the Prime Minister
is the defacto head of state, but the president has the power. It might be
the other way around, but you get
On Fri, Jun 02, 2006 at 12:00:24PM +0300 or thereabouts, Andrei Popescu wrote:
Stephen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Heck even some republics have a figure head of state, France for example
has a Prime Minister and a President. If memory serves, the Prime Minister
is the defacto head of
Paul Johnson wrote:
If good ideas did spread, sales tax would be unconstitutional in more than
Oregon and New Hampshire,
Uh, sales tax is better than the alternative which is the income tax
which, correct me if I'm wrong, Oregon has. I much prefer my state of no
income tax and a sales
Curt Howland wrote:
It hasn't been a republic since at least the time of a large number of
people being forced at gun point to become citizens against their
will, 1865.
Most would also cite when the states lost their representatives in the
Federal government. 17th Ammendment, 1913. The
don't you people think this discussion is just a little outside the scope
of the mailing list?
On Fri, 2 Jun 2006, Steve Lamb wrote:
Curt Howland wrote:
It hasn't been a republic since at least the time of a large number of
people being forced at gun point to become citizens against their
Liudmila Yafremava wrote:
don't you people think this discussion is just a little outside the
scope of the mailing list?
I think you are right. The problem is that the mailing lists and forums
that are dedicated to discussions about politics and religion always
degenerate into flamefests
* Steve Lamb [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2006 Jun 02 15:19 -0500]:
Curt Howland wrote:
It hasn't been a republic since at least the time of a large number of
people being forced at gun point to become citizens against their
will, 1865.
Most would also cite when the states lost their
On Jun 2, 2006, at 4:14 PM, Steve Lamb wrote:
Curt Howland wrote:
It hasn't been a republic since at least the time of a large
number of
people being forced at gun point to become citizens against their
will, 1865.
Most would also cite when the states lost their representatives
in
On Friday 02 June 2006 13:12, Liudmila Yafremava wrote:
don't you people think this discussion is just a little outside the scope
of the mailing list?
The stated scope for this mailing list is Debian's users. I'd say we're
still well within the realm of that.
--
Paul Johnson
Email and IM
On Friday 02 June 2006 13:11, Steve Lamb wrote:
Paul Johnson wrote:
If good ideas did spread, sales tax would be unconstitutional in more
than Oregon and New Hampshire,
Uh, sales tax is better than the alternative which is the income tax
which, correct me if I'm wrong, Oregon has. I
Paul Johnson wrote:
OK, stay in the regressive hellhole you live in and avoid infecting Oregon,
then.
What you call regressive I call fair, equitable and just. None of which
the hellhole you live in can claim.
Environmental issues are a joke.
Spilled gasoline creates groundwater
On Friday 02 June 2006 15:00, Steve Lamb wrote:
Paul Johnson wrote:
OK, stay in the regressive hellhole you live in and avoid infecting
Oregon, then.
What you call regressive I call fair, equitable and just. None of
which the hellhole you live in can claim.
That's fair. OTOH, we
Steve Lamb wrote:
Curt Howland wrote:
It hasn't been a republic since at least the time of a large number of
people being forced at gun point to become citizens against their
will, 1865.
Most would also cite when the states lost their representatives in the
Federal government.
Paul Johnson wrote:
That's fair. OTOH, we don't want people moving here, just spend money and
remember to go home when your done visiting.
How about I just gas up on the Cali line and spend all the exhaust in your
craphole on the way to Washington where I'll gas up on the other side of
On Friday 02 June 2006 15:53, Steve Lamb wrote:
Paul Johnson wrote:
That's fair. OTOH, we don't want people moving here, just spend money
and remember to go home when your done visiting.
How about I just gas up on the Cali line and spend all the exhaust in
your craphole on the way to
On May 31, 2006, at 9:39 PM, Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
Pascal Hakim wrote:
Australian governor-generals are chosen by the prime minister...
(including John Kerr), and can be dismissed by the prime minister.
Yes,
we technically have a race condition at the top of our government.
(But
On Wed, May 31, 2006 at 09:32:37AM -0700, Steve Lamb wrote:
Paul Johnson wrote:
Just wait until Alito elects Bush to a third term as president of the US
in
a 5 to 4 swing decision. Same as the last two elections, just change the
names of the 7 people allowed to vote in the last two
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Come off it, Paul. Even under the conditions that Gore's team asked for
on the recounts Bush won. In fact only under one recout, one Gore's team
*DIDN'T* ask for did Gore squeak by on a narrower margin than any of the other
recounts.
The only count in which all
On May 31, 2006, at 9:39 PM, Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
Pascal Hakim wrote:
Australian governor-generals are chosen by the prime minister...
(including John Kerr), and can be dismissed by the prime minister.
Yes,
we technically have a race condition at the top of our government.
(But
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Thursday 01 June 2006 09:52, Rich Johnson
[EMAIL PROTECTED] was heard to say:
The budget? ...waitthat's underflow.
Naa, it's damage due to deliberate overclocking by politicians.
- --
September 11th, 2001
The proudest day for gun control
Rich Johnson wrote:
On May 31, 2006, at 9:39 PM, Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
Pascal Hakim wrote:
Australian governor-generals are chosen by the prime minister...
(including John Kerr), and can be dismissed by the prime minister. Yes,
we technically have a race condition at the top of our
Curt Howland wrote:
On Thursday 01 June 2006 09:52, Rich Johnson
[EMAIL PROTECTED] was heard to say:
The budget? ...waitthat's underflow.
Naa, it's damage due to deliberate overclocking by politicians.
So, how would we implement liquid hydrogen or liquid helium cooling of
the
Ron Johnson wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Katipo wrote:
Mike McCarty wrote:
snip
This is a consequence of the fact that, in the USA, the Sovereign is
the Electorate,
Yes, but that's all rapidly changing, isn't it?
When was *your* Head of State
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Come off it, Paul. Even under the conditions that Gore's team asked for
on the recounts Bush won. In fact only under one recout, one Gore's team
*DIDN'T* ask for did Gore squeak by on a
Katipo wrote:
Now, now.
Just because I'm not American, don't assume I'm English.
It's a big world out here.
I come from a country that currently has its second, elected, female
head of state in office.
Oh, hang on a minute!
How many female American presidents have there been?
At
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Katipo wrote:
Ron Johnson wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Katipo wrote:
Mike McCarty wrote:
snip
This is a consequence of the fact that, in the USA, the Sovereign is
the Electorate,
Yes, but that's all
On Jun 1, 2006, at 10:43 AM, Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:At least one already. And she wasn't even elected for the two terms she was in office, so she can still serve two more terms. Edith Wilson is dead!
On Thu, Jun 01, 2006 at 09:59:35AM -0500 or thereabouts, Ron Johnson wrote:
snip
Given your .au address, I presumed you are Australian. The
Australian Head of State is ... Elizabeth II.
As she is for the rest of the Commonwealth, but in name only. She is
obligated to follow the instructions
Stephen wrote:
BTW even the U.S. has a commonwealth state -- Massachusetts, which still
refers to the Governor as his excellency a holdover from the British
tradition when it was the major of the 13 colonies, and the Governor,
was the Governor General, representative of the Queen of England.
On Thursday 01 June 2006 06:29, Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Come off it, Paul. Even under the conditions that Gore's team asked
for on the recounts Bush won. In fact only under one recout, one Gore's
team *DIDN'T* ask for did Gore squeak by on a narrower margin
On Thursday 01 June 2006 03:50, Rich Johnson wrote:
On May 31, 2006, at 9:39 PM, Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
Pascal Hakim wrote:
Australian governor-generals are chosen by the prime minister...
(including John Kerr), and can be dismissed by the prime minister.
Yes,
we technically have a
On Thursday 01 June 2006 07:39, Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
Curt Howland wrote:
On Thursday 01 June 2006 09:52, Rich Johnson
[EMAIL PROTECTED] was heard to say:
The budget? ...waitthat's underflow.
Naa, it's damage due to deliberate overclocking by politicians.
So, how would we
Paul Johnson wrote:
That's typical in elections except ties, and not surprising nobody bothered
or
wanted to check for absentee ballots. This is one of the two problems Oregon
eliminated by going to vote by mail.
So, all voting is done by mail? That's different.
-Roberto
--
On Thu, Jun 01, 2006 at 09:39:28AM -0500, Ron Johnson wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Come off it, Paul. Even under the conditions that Gore's team asked
for
on the recounts Bush won. In fact only under one
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Thursday 01 June 2006 13:03, Roberto C. Sanchez
[EMAIL PROTECTED] was heard to say:
So, how would we implement liquid hydrogen or liquid helium cooling
of the budget?
Throw in the politicians! Problem solved.
- --
September 11th, 2001
The
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Thursday 01 June 2006 14:39, Roberto C. Sanchez
[EMAIL PROTECTED] was heard to say:
That's typical in elections except ties, and not surprising
nobody bothered or wanted to check for absentee ballots. This is
one of the two problems Oregon
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, Jun 01, 2006 at 09:39:28AM -0500, Ron Johnson wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Come off it, Paul. Even under the conditions that Gore's
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Thursday 01 June 2006 15:22, [EMAIL PROTECTED] was heard to
say:
To my mind, that is when america stopped being a democracy.
The US was never a democracy. It was founded as a representitive
republic of limited powers.
It hasn't been a republic
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Thu, 01 Jun 2006 14:09:43 -0400
Roberto C. Sanchez [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Paul Johnson wrote:
That's typical in elections except ties, and not surprising nobody
bothered or wanted to check for absentee ballots. This is one of
the two
On Thu, Jun 01, 2006 at 01:55:32PM -0400 or thereabouts, Roberto C. Sanchez
wrote:
Stephen wrote:
BTW even the U.S. has a commonwealth state -- Massachusetts, which still
refers to the Governor as his excellency a holdover from the British
tradition when it was the major of the 13
On Thursday 01 June 2006 11:59, Curt Howland wrote:
It actually solves a great many problems. There is a paper trail,
which eliminates the greatest threat of electronic voting,
undetectable fraud. It also is convenient for anyone and everyone
equally, people can also vote early if they want.
On Thursday 01 June 2006 13:08, Curt Howland wrote:
On Thursday 01 June 2006 15:22, [EMAIL PROTECTED] was heard to
say:
To my mind, that is when america stopped being a democracy.
The US was never a democracy. It was founded as a representitive
republic of limited powers.
It hasn't been
On Thursday 01 June 2006 11:09, Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
Paul Johnson wrote:
That's typical in elections except ties, and not surprising nobody
bothered or wanted to check for absentee ballots. This is one of the two
problems Oregon eliminated by going to vote by mail.
So, all voting is
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Katipo wrote:
Mike McCarty wrote:
snip
This is a consequence of the fact that, in the USA, the Sovereign is
the Electorate,
Yes, but that's all rapidly changing, isn't it?
When was *your* Head of State elected? Oh, wait, she wasn't, was
On Tuesday 30 May 2006 23:10, Ron Johnson wrote:
Katipo wrote:
Mike McCarty wrote:
snip
This is a consequence of the fact that, in the USA, the Sovereign is
the Electorate,
Yes, but that's all rapidly changing, isn't it?
When was *your* Head of State elected? Oh, wait, she
Paul Johnson wrote:
Just wait until Alito elects Bush to a third term as president of the US in
a 5 to 4 swing decision. Same as the last two elections, just change the
names of the 7 people allowed to vote in the last two elections...
I see this claim constantly. You know what, it is
Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
Paul Johnson wrote:
Just wait until Alito elects Bush to a third term as president of the US in
a 5 to 4 swing decision. Same as the last two elections, just change the
names of the 7 people allowed to vote in the last two elections...
I see this claim
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
Paul Johnson wrote:
Just wait until Alito elects Bush to a third term as president of the US
in
a 5 to 4 swing decision. Same as the last two elections, just change the
names of the 7 people allowed to vote in the
On Wednesday 31 May 2006 04:27, Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
Paul Johnson wrote:
Just wait until Alito elects Bush to a third term as president of the
US in a 5 to 4 swing decision. Same as the last two elections, just
change the names of the 7 people allowed to vote in the last two
Paul Johnson wrote:
Just wait until Alito elects Bush to a third term as president of the US in
a 5 to 4 swing decision. Same as the last two elections, just change the
names of the 7 people allowed to vote in the last two elections...
Come off it, Paul. Even under the conditions that
Ron Johnson wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Katipo wrote:
Mike McCarty wrote:
snip
This is a consequence of the fact that, in the USA, the Sovereign is
the Electorate,
Yes, but that's all rapidly changing, isn't it?
When was *your* Head of State elected? Oh, wait,
On Wednesday 31 May 2006 02:35, Wulfy wrote:
The Queen may be Head of state but the person with power here is the
Prime Minister... The Queen is just a figurehead...
She does occasionally excersize her power. Most notably, back in the late
1990s, she declared a vote for Quebec to secede as
On Wed, May 31, 2006 at 10:35:02AM -0700 or thereabouts, Paul Johnson wrote:
On Wednesday 31 May 2006 02:35, Wulfy wrote:
The Queen may be Head of state but the person with power here is the
Prime Minister... The Queen is just a figurehead...
She does occasionally excersize her power.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wednesday 31 May 2006 13:39, Paul Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] was
heard to say:
I see this claim constantly. You know what, it is completely
without merit. If the same thing had happened to elect Gore or
Kerry, you would likely be praising
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Wulfy wrote:
Ron Johnson wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Katipo wrote:
Mike McCarty wrote:
snip
This is a consequence of the fact that, in the USA, the Sovereign is
the Electorate,
Yes, but that's all rapidly changing,
On Wed, May 31, 2006 at 03:31:49PM -0500, Ron Johnson wrote:
The Queen may be Head of state but the person with power here is the
Prime Minister... The Queen is just a figurehead...
Australian constitutional crisis of 1975. Unelected Governor-
General Sir John Kerr forced the elected PM
Pascal Hakim wrote:
Australian governor-generals are chosen by the prime minister...
(including John Kerr), and can be dismissed by the prime minister. Yes,
we technically have a race condition at the top of our government.
(But finally! An off-topic debian-user politics thread on
Steve Lamb wrote:
[some excellent stuff]
[1] To explain for any non-Americans, it's a trick question. The Declaration
of Independence states that rights are inalienable and self-evident. The Bill
of Rights, part of the Constitution, enumerate these rights. It lists them.
A minor point,
Mike McCarty wrote:
snip
This is a consequence of the fact that, in the USA, the Sovereign is
the Electorate,
Yes, but that's all rapidly changing, isn't it?
Regards,
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Roberto C. Sanchez [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Paul Johnson wrote:
That's like claiming you're paying twice to cross a toll bridge, never mind
there are usually alternate (longer) routes and the toll goes away once the
bridge is paid for...
Never been to Florida, eh? It is a state that
On Tue, 2006-05-09 at 09:28 -0400, Matthias Julius wrote:
Roberto C. Sanchez [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Paul Johnson wrote:
That's like claiming you're paying twice to cross a toll bridge, never
mind
there are usually alternate (longer) routes and the toll goes away once
the
On Monday 08 May 2006 19:35, Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
Paul Johnson wrote:
That's like claiming you're paying twice to cross a toll bridge, never
mind there are usually alternate (longer) routes and the toll goes away
once the bridge is paid for...
Never been to Florida, eh? It is a
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Tuesday 09 May 2006 11:35, Paul Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] was heard
to say:
My assumptions assume a working government, not Florida.
You assume what is not now, nor never was.
And you do know what it means when you ass-u-me...?
- --
September
On Tue, 2006-05-09 at 07:41 -0700, Paul Johnson wrote:
On Monday 08 May 2006 19:35, Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
Paul Johnson wrote:
That's like claiming you're paying twice to cross a toll bridge, never
mind there are usually alternate (longer) routes and the toll goes away
once the
You assume what is not now, nor never was.
And you do know what it means when you ass-u-me...?
i assume people on d-u will never user double-negatives. :)
--
Matt Zagrabelny - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - (218) 726 8844
University of Minnesota Duluth
Information Technology Systems Services
PGP key
On May 6, 2006, at 5:11 PM, Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
Paul, why do you persist? Infrastructure != education. Those are two
completely different things. Without roads, emergency services could
not get to you. Without traffic lights and other signage, the roads
(which are needed for things
On May 6, 2006, at 4:27 PM, Paul Johnson wrote:
On Saturday 06 May 2006 06:55, Andrei Popescu wrote:
Why so complicated? Just give people the option to *choose* between
public or private SS programs. The same for schooling. If I send my
children to a private school I wouldn't have to pay the
Roberto C. Sanchez [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
As far as civic buildings and courts, it's obvious that you are either
just being argumentative or simply do not understand the role of
government. Civic buildings and courts (and roads and traffic signage,
for that matter) directly support the
Matthias Julius wrote:
To cite the U.S. Constitution
(from http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html):
,
| Section 8 - Powers of Congress
|
| The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties,
| Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common
| Defence and
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Monday 08 May 2006 13:33, Matthias Julius [EMAIL PROTECTED]
was heard to say:
The U.S. Constitution does not list all 'jobs' of the government.
Yes, it does. If an additional job is required, amend it so that the
government has that power
On May 8, 2006, at 2:22 PM, Steve Lamb wrote:
Matthias Julius wrote:
To cite the U.S. Constitution
(from http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html):
,
| Section 8 - Powers of Congress
|
| The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties,
| Imposts and Excises, to pay the
Paul Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Saturday 06 May 2006 06:55, Andrei Popescu wrote:
Why so complicated? Just give people the option to *choose* between
public or private SS programs. The same for schooling. If I send my
children to a private school I wouldn't have to pay the tax
On Mon, May 08, 2006 at 11:47:15PM +0300, Andrei Popescu wrote:
Paul Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Saturday 06 May 2006 06:55, Andrei Popescu wrote:
Why so complicated? Just give people the option to *choose* between
public or private SS programs. The same for schooling. If I
Paul E Condon wrote:
And, you get to *choose* something else for your own children, if you can
pay for it. But you are not paying twice. You are paying once, your share
for everybody, and once for your own.
Uh, sorry, BZZZT, no. If I am paying for everyone else's why aren't they
paying
On Monday 08 May 2006 13:47, Andrei Popescu wrote:
Paul Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Saturday 06 May 2006 06:55, Andrei Popescu wrote:
Why so complicated? Just give people the option to *choose* between
public or private SS programs. The same for schooling. If I send my
children
On Monday 08 May 2006 17:17, Steve Lamb wrote:
Paul E Condon wrote:
And, you get to *choose* something else for your own children, if you can
pay for it. But you are not paying twice. You are paying once, your share
for everybody, and once for your own.
Uh, sorry, BZZZT, no. If I am
Paul Johnson wrote:
That's like claiming you're paying twice to cross a toll bridge, never mind
there are usually alternate (longer) routes and the toll goes away once the
bridge is paid for...
Never been to Florida, eh? It is a state that is criss-crossed with
toll roads, where the
Paul Johnson wrote:
I read what you wrote, but what you suggest would mean, by extension, I
should
be able to choose who I flush my toilet through (as opposed to just the
city's sewer), whose streets I drive on (government monopoly on
transportation right now), and choose who I have for
Monique Y. Mudama [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Even though I just ripped into you a few posts ago, you do have a
point here. It would be interesting if social security could be
altered so that (this is just off the top of my head here, so I'm sure
it's not by any means perfect, but maybe the
Monique Y. Mudama [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Even though I just ripped into you a few posts ago, you do have a
point here. It would be interesting if social security could be
altered so that (this is just off the top of my head here, so I'm sure
it's not by any means perfect, but maybe the
On Saturday 06 May 2006 06:55, Andrei Popescu wrote:
Why so complicated? Just give people the option to *choose* between
public or private SS programs. The same for schooling. If I send my
children to a private school I wouldn't have to pay the tax and even
get back what I already payed since
Paul Johnson wrote:
On Saturday 06 May 2006 06:55, Andrei Popescu wrote:
Why so complicated? Just give people the option to *choose* between
public or private SS programs. The same for schooling. If I send my
children to a private school I wouldn't have to pay the tax and even
get back what I
On Saturday 06 May 2006 14:11, Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
Paul Johnson wrote:
On Saturday 06 May 2006 06:55, Andrei Popescu wrote:
Why so complicated? Just give people the option to *choose* between
public or private SS programs. The same for schooling. If I send my
children to a private
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Infrastructure != education. Those are two
completely different things.
I disagree only because the same argument is used to support both
efforts by government: That without government doing it for the
good of all, there would be people who would
Am 2006-05-01 17:27:06, schrieb Matthias Julius:
Curt Howland [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
For $200, you can get the Robinson Curriculum, a complete K-12 home
study kit, except math books. Math books are $50 each, new, approx
one per year depending on student speed and aptitude of course.
Roberto C. Sanchez [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Matthias Julius wrote:
Excuse me, but there is no provision to provide basic needs like food
and medical care for poor people in the US?
There is. However, the majority of it is handled through private
donations. Rescue missions, soup
Roberto C. Sanchez [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Matthias Julius wrote:
Is there no other way to create a motive other than money?
There are other ways. Profit, however, is provably the most effective.
Below you say charities and church would setup more schools
if they had not to compete
Roberto C. Sanchez [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Wulfy wrote:
Hmm... and who pays for this foster-schooling? The state?
Just like they do now with food and clothes. I had a friend who was a
foster parent for several years. He and his wife have taken in many
kids over the years.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Thursday 04 May 2006 13:54, Matthias Julius [EMAIL PROTECTED]
was heard to say:
Isn't better to support a child to live with his/her parents in a
stable home environment instead of foster care?
No one is arguing with you about such better
On May 4, 2006, at 11:31 AM, Matthias Julius wrote:
Isn't better to support a child to live with his/her parents in a
stable home environment instead of foster care?
Usually, but not always. You might be dealing with an abusive
''stable'' home environment.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to
Curt Howland [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Thursday 04 May 2006 13:54, Matthias Julius [EMAIL PROTECTED]
was heard to say:
Isn't better to support a child to live with his/her parents in a
stable home environment instead of foster care?
No one is arguing with you about such better ideas. Go
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Thursday 04 May 2006 17:55, Rich Johnson was heard to say:
So move to VT and live closer to your dream. You can even join the
ranks of those railing against the flatlanders as you're out
looking for dinner. But beware, you'll always be a come
1 - 100 of 390 matches
Mail list logo
