Re: Mountains Rush and Moore

From: Scott Hedrick (dinehnm_at_yahoo.com)
Date: 08/18/04 

Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 13:29:13 -0400

"John E. Jaku-Hing" <johnejakuhing@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:b4cbbde8.0408180517.22b99400@posting.google.com...
> The nature of business is to squeeze every drop
> of profit out of a resource or service, then promptly deem it obsolete
> and unnecessary and move on. This flies in the face of how humans
> adapt to change.

Time for people to change.

>What you are suggesting is that the world revolve
> around business.

It revolves around *economics*.

The nature of government (when implemented properly)
> is to perform the will of the people.

> Libertarians have very good intentions,

I'm sure the Republicans and Democrats and even Greens have good
*intentions* as well. We all know where that road leads.

> > The American public needs to be sold on this. Unless the public accepts
this
> > and changes the market, the problem will get worse. The fault lies not
with
> > business, but with ourselves.
>
> Intellectualism and the pursuit of higher education have always been
> more important over "business".

Prove it. Let's see some references.

> > I'd also kill a lot of tax cuts. I see no reason why capital gains
should be
> > taxed differently than wages. A dollar of capital gains spends the same
way
> > as a dollar of wages.
>
> I actually disagree. Capital gains is the reward for risking one's
> notional

How does a dollar of capital gains spend any different than a dollar from
wages or even simple interest?

> >
> > Some national debt is a useful tool for managing money. A national debt
that
> > can't be paid off with the full income from an entire administration is
> > absurd.
>
> Debt is never good.

I didn't say it was *good*. I said it was *useful*. A national debt and the
use of debt instruments gives the government the ability to control fiscal
policies.

> > >Also, do not lecture anyone about changing careers after one
> > > spends 50-100K on an education, especially when that major is a
> > > passion for them.
> >
> > If that's what it takes to survive, then tough.
>
> Uh...a very trite rebuttal.

Truth hurts. Life isn't fair, and there's no reason to expect it to be.
Markets change.

>Not enough bright minds = reduced applicant pool for
> CIA intelligence/defense work = reduced national security = we're up
> *** creek and are no longer a superpower = China becomes the new
> superpower.

Yep. I don't see the public caring if they can still get cheap crap at
WalMart.

> Don't complain to me if "Darwin in action" results in the destruction
> of the US because we've devolved into a service oriented society.

Yep. I'm not complaining about Darwin. Just watching the results.

> > > > Why *should* the government do that? Why shouldn't the private
sector do
> > it
> > > > entirely by itself? Where in the Constitution does the government
have
> > the
> > > > obligation to do so?
> > > >
> > >
> > > You are using an idealogical argument to rebut the poster's more
> > > pragmatic one.
> >
> > If "pragmatic" means "whine about life".
>
> I like to whine

Yep. It's much easier than actually doing something to fix the problem.

> > If the
> > > government is good at initiating R&D projects, then this route
> > > *should* be considered. The constitution has nothing to do with this
> > > argument.
> >
> > The Constitution has to do with the limits of government authority. It
> > doesn't matter how good the government is at something, if they don't
have
> > the legal authority to do something they shouldn't be doing it.
> >
>
> Ah...I love the Constituion. I especially like the way government
> implements it's content. Freedom of speech limitations, illegal
> search and seizure. Gotta love the way the constitution is being used
> for toilet paper nowadays.

That's nice. Now how about answering the question I asked.

> > > Market, market. People overglorify capitalism like it's actually akin
> > > to patriotism.
> >
> > With good reason. Capitalism made this country what it is.
>
> Capitalism is a relatively new concept in American history. Many
> people think that capitalism is some system forged with the founding
> of this country. Wrong. It's about 100 years old

I'm sure the capitalists like George Washington, Ben Franklin, and the other
founding fathers who operated for-profit businesses would disagree.

>China is the pinnacle of how capitalism should be
> exercised, according to it's idealogues. They're much more
> capitalistic than we are. Maybe you should move there since you like
> it so much?

Please provide a verifiable reference to a post where I gave an opinion as
to my preferences about China.

> > > Gore would not turn back the clock on stem cell research and try to
> > > incorporate a puritanical, "leave it to beaver" nightmare sitcom into
> > > our society,
> >
> > That's nice. Please provide verifiable references.
>
> Gore is a known proponent of scientific research.

Then it should be easy for you to provide specific references where he
actually did *something* to support stem cell research. He was in a position
of authority for 8 years.

> But since you
> didn't read the Economist essay I offered you

What makes you think I didn't?

>Church groups get excited about him
> because they actually believe that he'll somehow "turn back the clock"
> and bring us back to a more wholesome time (ala "Leave it to Beaver"
> analogy).

Reference, please.

>But, why ban the use of stem cells in the
> first place? It makes no logical sense.

I happen to agree.

>I would venture that a mushroom
> cloud would be over Tora Bora as a response to 9/11.

Hard to justify that.

> > > The market is not collaborative enough to have created the internet.
> >
> > Prove it.
>
> Gore might as well have invented the internet. Without the internet,
> we would be running several proprietary protocol.

That's nice. Now answer the question I asked.

> > > Corporations in this country are short minded, and concentrate on
> > > quarterly results without looking at long term objectives and the "big
> > > picture".
> >
> > Why should they do anything different, since that's what the market
wants?
>
> The market will not save us when oil is at $100/barrel (it's coming
> baby, hang on!) after Hubbert's peak is realized.

The market will save us if it's profitable. That's the whole purpose of the
market- to make a profit.

> Business will not care to respond to millions dying from the plague.

Sure it will- if there's money in it.

> but when it comes to an
> upcoming energy crisis from the oil fields running dry...silence.

You said that a proper government's purpose is to respond to the will of the
people: " The nature of government (when implemented properly)
is to perform the will of the people." The facts show that the people want
to buy SUVs and other gas guzzlers. Seems to me that the government is
behaving exactly according to the will of the people.

> > > > Please provide verifiable evidence as to the specific amount of
> > attention he
> > > > is required to pay to a given area.
> > > >
> > >
> > > Stem cell research.
> >
> > That's nice. Now answer the question I asked.
>
> Gore is a proponent of science. Bush is a throwback to puritanical
> times.

That's nice. Now answer the question I asked, which was "Please provide
verifiable evidence as to the specific amount of attention he is required to
pay to a given area."

> > Exactly. Every business started with a person taking the risk. Most
fail,
> > but some don't. They hire other people. It's people like Bill Gates who
are
> > responsible for creating jobs, not George Bush or John Kerry.
>
> Your pyramid/matrix schemes are not business.

Which schemes are those? Please provide a verifiable reference to any post
where I promoted any kind of pyramid/matrix scheme.

 I could easily become a
> millionaire over 1-2 years if I quit my job and began a predatory
> lending business fleecing old people out of their homes with
> outrageous interest rates and the imminent foreclosure.

Sure. Why would you want to?

>Plus, there's more to life than money, like
> learning, sex, and snowboarding :).

Of course. There's chocolate, Star Trek and Salma Hayek.

In the future, trim your quotes better.

Quantcast