Re: Mountains Rush and Moore
From: John E. Jaku-Hing (johnejakuhing_at_yahoo.com)
Date: 08/19/04
- Next message: Rand Simberg: "Re: Mountains Rush and Moore"
- Previous message: Herb Schaltegger: "Re: shuttle mount points."
- In reply to: Scott Hedrick: "Re: Mountains Rush and Moore"
- Next in thread: Scott Hedrick: "Re: Mountains Rush and Moore"
- Reply: Scott Hedrick: "Re: Mountains Rush and Moore"
- Reply: Alan Anderson: "Re: Mountains Rush and Moore"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: 19 Aug 2004 06:45:32 -0700
>
> Time for people to change.
>
People as a majority refuse to change. Therefore, change will not
happen. Hey, just like a democracy!
> >What you are suggesting is that the world revolve
> > around business.
>
> It revolves around *economics*.
Economics is an end to a means. It's icing on the cake for democracy.
>
> 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.
>
It leads to "democracy" in Iraq for the sake of oil security, delaying
the realization of the devastation imminent from Hubbert's peak just a
little longer.
>
> Prove it. Let's see some references.
>
Usually, my proof is in the form of empirical evidence contained
within literature I've pointed out online. Can you prove Mr. Atta and
his band of merry thugs crashed into the World Trade Center? I bet
you cannot. I need proof in the form of fingerprint, DNA testing,
etc.
>
> How does a dollar of capital gains spend any different than a dollar from
> wages or even simple interest?
>
True. I withdraw my former comment. I suppose that may be the
difference between us. You are not flexible for debate. I am.
>
> 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.
>
Yes. I see your point (sarcasm). We control them quite well
currently, don't we? If this government were operating as a business,
we would be deep in Ch. 11 by now. The sad fact is that the country
will not realize it is defunct until after the bloody class and race
revolution is over and a inferior government is installed in place of
the current one.
>
> Truth hurts. Life isn't fair, and there's no reason to expect it to be.
> Markets change.
>
Try calling Harvard and telling them their institution is no longer
needed, as tradespeople are the future of this country. You may be
called in for a photograph to frame and captioned "the most short
sighted man on Earth"
>
> Yep. I don't see the public caring if they can still get cheap crap at
> WalMart.
The public by in large are made of ignorant tradespeople. No one
cares about getting a good education anymore. Even colleges are ripe
with students who actually believe that their diploma is a money
machine. People actually also believe that money = hapiness. I've
worked in an investment bank with bankers making 7 figure annual
bonuses, and witnessed their cocaine parties in between their 80-100
hour workweeks. Money, in its raw form, generally equals destruction
of one's humanity. It's perceived as an end, not a means.
>
> > 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.
Let's see how long you feel patriotic when (not if) housing prices
crash 50-70%, revolution is on the streets, and hoardes of people come
begging to your door for food after $70-100/bbl oil.
>
> Yep. It's much easier than actually doing something to fix the problem.
>
That's some nice snipping. Hannity would be proud.
>
> That's nice. Now how about answering the question I asked.
>
What question? Sorry, I snipped it.
>
> I'm sure the capitalists like George Washington, Ben Franklin, and the other
> founding fathers who operated for-profit businesses would disagree.
>
Aristocrats. NOT capitalists. The advent of full fledged capitalism
is approximately 100-125 years old. In your definition, the soviets
were capitalists as well, because they established trade with other
countries. Everyone's a capitalist. Hooray!
> >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.
>
Given the empirical evidence you've provided, China is a perfect place
for you to ex-patriate to, since it is inferable that you only prefer
America for its capitalism. China is a utopia of capitalism, much
more free with commerce than we are. You'd probably like it there.
>
> 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.
>
Anyone who gets in the way of scientific research gets run over. Bush
is losing in virtually all battleground states, save MO and OH. Stem
cell research will be revived, because Kerry will not talk to his
imaginary friend for advice.
> > But since you
> > didn't read the Economist essay I offered you
>
> What makes you think I didn't?
>
Am I really typing this?
> >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.
Sure:
>
> >But, why ban the use of stem cells in the
> > first place? It makes no logical sense.
>
> I happen to agree.
Please write to someone at whitehouse.gov and sign as many petitions
as possible if you truly agree.
>
> >I would venture that a mushroom
> > cloud would be over Tora Bora as a response to 9/11.
>
> Hard to justify that.
True. Hard to justify that Bush stands "strong against terrorism"
either.
>
> > > > 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.
>
Since markets are not collaborative by their very nature of being
competitive, it is entirely rational to conclude that the internet
would be not around as you see it. The probable likelihood is that
the other poster's representation would be more reflective of today's
"internet". A proprietary, heterogeneous platform in which your
posting may not reach me because of incompatibility issues, and vice
versa. Proof enough for me. A 4 year degree graduate may not agree,
but in that respect, I suggest you return to school so you may
understand things more effectively and not see things as black and
white. I would be a space alien, and you would have no proof to offer
that I am not. Heck, Bush may not even be president!
>
> The market will save us if it's profitable. That's the whole purpose of the
> market- to make a profit.
>
That's true. But the market is not the panacea for everything.
Making money is just icing on the cake, a small formality if you will,
as far as this country and its principles are concerned. It is simply
a vehicle for sustaining a stable society and keeping people happy.
Your tone suggests the system is some sort of diety or something.
> > Business will not care to respond to millions dying from the plague.
>
> Sure it will- if there's money in it.
By then, you'll be decaying in the ground as well, a victim of this
plague. Capitalism is too reactive, not proactive, to respond
properly to disease. I see Pfizer, SK, etc are doing very well in
curing diseases. There's lots of money in curing people's diseases,
but more money in helping losers get hard-ons.
>
> > 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."
Please provide me with a computer simulation proving that capitalism
is a sustainable system devoid of boom/bust cycles as a prelude of
revolution. Rhetoric is not sufficient. Can you construct said
simulation?
>
> > > 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.
Lending is a pyramid scheme. You are helping to amplify a national
housing bubble that will burst louder every day is continues to
expand, with the last ones in losing big time. Please provide
evidence that you do not operate a 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?
Why would I want to become a millionaire? If I were greedy enough, I
guess I would answer "Because money is God to me!"
>
> >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.
John E. Jaku...........................................HING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
When the housing bubble bursts and predatory lenders take to the
streets looking for work (once again), don't forget to visit:
www.hud.gov/homes/index.cfm
- Next message: Rand Simberg: "Re: Mountains Rush and Moore"
- Previous message: Herb Schaltegger: "Re: shuttle mount points."
- In reply to: Scott Hedrick: "Re: Mountains Rush and Moore"
- Next in thread: Scott Hedrick: "Re: Mountains Rush and Moore"
- Reply: Scott Hedrick: "Re: Mountains Rush and Moore"
- Reply: Alan Anderson: "Re: Mountains Rush and Moore"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
