>The truth seems to be between these two arguments.
I think that's valid. Rockets were a technology who's time had come. I
think the fact that delivering 1000 bombs could destroy a nation had
something to do with how quickly they were developed at first, but in a
world that had a jet starting
Although I normally like Stirling Newberry this deconstruction is not
one of his better blog posts.
The truth seems to be between these two arguments.
On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 3:59 PM, Wayne Eddy wrote:
> The deconstruction seems more reasonable than the article to me.
>
> On Sat, Feb 5, 2011 at
The deconstruction seems more reasonable than the article to me.
On Sat, Feb 5, 2011 at 7:44 AM, KZK wrote:
> > Ronn! Blankenship
>
>
> > Space stasis: What the strange persistence of rockets can teach us
> > about innovation. - By Neal Stephenson - Slate Magazine -
> > http://www.slate.com/id/2
> Ronn! Blankenship
> Space stasis: What the strange persistence of rockets can teach us
> about innovation. - By Neal Stephenson - Slate Magazine -
> http://www.slate.com/id/2283469/
I just read an article that completely deconstructed that article:
http://www.correntewire.com/shape_social_pro
Space stasis: What the strange persistence of rockets can teach us
about innovation. - By Neal Stephenson - Slate Magazine -
http://www.slate.com/id/2283469/
___
http://box535.bluehost.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
Dan Minette wrote:
>
>> All the billions that g*vernments invest all the
>> time to make mothers breastfeed, and those sociopaths
>> and perverts create a Social Network that criminalizes
>> it. They should be exiled to Antarctica.
>
> Actually, it doesn't, Alberto. Facebook is free, last time I
On Dec 7, 2010, at 4:25 PM, trent shipley wrote:
On Dec 7, 2010 3:15 PM, "Dan Minette" wrote:
>Only a sociopath and pervert can think that
>breastfeeding is pornography. It's disrespectful
>to...
Actually, it doesn't, Alberto. Facebook is free, last time I
looked. I can
choose to use it
Ultimately, these sorts of issues are due to insufficient diversity.
As long as there is a majority (or perhaps even a large uniform
minority) who believe something strongly, there will be businesses or
government policies that cater to this majority. Whether government
representative or business l
>A business decision that injures public health.
Were facebook the internet, you might have something. But, I just typed
breastfeeding videos into google, and got a zillion hits, checked the first
one, and found a site with over a score of videos. Some had nothing to do
with public health; other
A business decision that injures public health.
On Dec 7, 2010 3:15 PM, "Dan Minette" wrote:
>Only a sociopath and pervert can think that
>breastfeeding is pornography. It's disrespectful
>to...
Actually, it doesn't, Alberto. Facebook is free, last time I looked. I can
choose to use it or not
>Only a sociopath and pervert can think that
>breastfeeding is pornography. It's disrespectful
>to breastfeeding (and to pornography too, but wfc?)
>All the billions that g*vernments invest all the
>time to make mothers breastfeed, and those sociopaths
>and perverts create a Social Network that
tiveness.
>
> But this seems to be a much better question to answer in the real world.
>
> The answer is that the culture at large has some very unhealthy and
> dysfunctional ideas about nudity and sex, and tends to perceive
> women's exposed breasts (regardless of the re
On Dec 7, 2010, at 5:44 AM, Alberto Monteiro wrote:
Why do people join Facebook, when it's owned
by sociopaths and perverts?
and then wrote:
It's not the people that join that are sociopaths
and perverts, it's the people that control the site
that are sociopaths and pe
On Dec 7, 2010, at 11:50 AM, Alberto Monteiro wrote:
Dave Land wrote:
Why do people join Facebook, when it's owned
by sociopaths and perverts?
Well, of course the sociopaths and perverts to which you refer are
not
on my friends list, so they don't have any meaningful im
Dave Land wrote:
>
>> Why do people join Facebook, when it's owned
>> by sociopaths and perverts?
>
> Well, of course the sociopaths and perverts to which
> you refer are not on my friends list, so they don't
> have any meaningful impact on my Facebook experi
John Williams wrote:
>
>> Hard to know if the quiet was due to trolling or some externality.
>
> It looks to me like this email list is usually quiet because the vast
> majority of the members have self-selected so that they have many of
> the same opinions. You do not get many interesting discus
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 5:15 PM, David Hobby wrote:
> Maybe YOU could repost?
No, see my previous post in this thread. I still feel the same. And
I'm not trying to be difficult here, I just am not interested in
discussing a subject that I feel has already been adequately
discussed, unless someone
John Williams wrote:
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 12:07 PM, David Hobby wrote:
That is what I'm taking away from this, too.
Dan's response seemed on topic to me.
If you would like to discuss any specific points from the last time
this came up (late last year), I would be glad to discuss. Please
quo
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 12:07 PM, David Hobby wrote:
> That is what I'm taking away from this, too.
> Dan's response seemed on topic to me.
If you would like to discuss any specific points from the last time
this came up (late last year), I would be glad to discuss. Please
quote the specific point
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 12:00 PM,
dsummersmi...@comcast.net wrote:
> Actually, I gave a lot more data this time
Do you mean that the reason you dropped out of the discussion last
time was because you could not respond to my specific points because
you did not have enough data?
In that case,
worked for the investment banks, and then wrote. I'm sure you see why I am
coming to the conclusion that you'd like to avoid specifics when discussing
this topic. I can understand why, data do not support your conclusions.
Dan M.
...
John--
That is what I'm taking away from t
Original Message:
-
From: John Williams jwilliams4...@gmail.com
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2009 10:30:03 -0700
To: brin-l@mccmedia.com
Subject: Re: Why not discuss the topic?
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 6:43 AM, Dan M wrote:
> Your writings are consistent with the viewpoint of one
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 6:43 AM, Dan M wrote:
> Your writings are consistent with the viewpoint of one who knows government
> is the root cause of all that is wrong a priori, and needs not look at data
> to look at the truth.
Just so you know:
1) I saw your similar post about this the first time
> -Original Message-
> From: brin-l-boun...@mccmedia.com [mailto:brin-l-boun...@mccmedia.com] On
> Behalf Of John Williams
> Sent: Saturday, July 18, 2009 12:41 AM
> To: Killer Bs (David Brin et al) Discussion
> Subject: Re: Why not discuss the topic?
>
>
>
This, of course, is purely libertarian 'capitalist' egotistical selfishness.
If everyone thought and behaved liked this - and it became governmental
policy - then we would indeed be living under Barbarism.
DANNY
2009/7/20 Alberto Monteiro
> Nick Arnett wrote:
> >
> >> It seems odd to conclude
On Mon, Jul 20, 2009 at 8:14 AM, Alberto Monteiro
wrote:
>
> G*vernment is consent robbery.
Sounds like my neighbor who says he isn't afraid to walk the streets at
night because "you can't rape the willing."
Yes, it is "consent robbery" if you choose that metaphor (or oxymoron).
There are other
Nick Arnett wrote:
>
>> It seems odd to conclude that the way to get other people to
>> behave as one thinks they should behave is to coerce them
>> at gunpoint
>
> There are people with guns showing up to demand that you pay
> your taxes? That suggests to me that you've been a bad, bad boy.
>
On Sun, Jul 19, 2009 at 11:19 PM, Nick Arnett wrote:
> Democracy, which is the subject at hand, is not based on that assumption and
> I suspect you learned that in high school civics, so I imagine you are being
> disingenuous.
Ah, that explains it. I thought the subject at hand was health care.
I
On Sun, Jul 19, 2009 at 10:44 PM, Doug Pensinger wrote:
>
>
> On Sat, Jul 18, 2009 at 1:09 AM, John Williams
> wrote:
> Many apologies for being able to make my point without being long winded.
Apparently I was too subtle. I simply meant to convey that there are
many questions that can be posed
On Sun, Jul 19, 2009 at 10:33 PM, John Williams wrote:
>
> Then don't throw them all out. I never suggested such a thing. I
> merely stated my preference for discussing ethical questions on their
> own merits rather than assuming that majority opinion is the ultimate
> word on every subject.
Dem
John wrote:
Limiting myself to the US, and just listing a few incidents that come to
> mind:
>
> Indian Removal Act
> Legal slavery
> Jim Crow laws
> Coverture
> Japanese American internment
> Joseph McCarthy
> Richard Nixon
>
Are we waiting for historical perspective to add Bush/Cheney to that l
On Sat, Jul 18, 2009 at 1:09 AM, John Williams wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 18, 2009 at 12:44 AM, Doug Pensinger wrote:
>
> > If regulations and restrictions have such a detrimental effect then why
> do
> > other, more restrictive nations have much more efficient and effective
&g
On Sun, Jul 19, 2009 at 10:10 PM, Nick Arnett wrote:
> If we're going to throw out all the flawed human institutions,
> nothing will be left, including your ideas.
Then don't throw them all out. I never suggested such a thing. I
merely stated my preference for discussing ethical questions on thei
If we're going to throw out all the flawed human institutions,
nothing will be left, including your ideas. I don't have to look
beyond my immediate family to see the injustices that our system has
allowed, but "good" isn't the same as "perfect." Argue better,
please.
On 7/19/09, John Williams
Limiting myself to the US, and just listing a few incidents that come to mind:
Indian Removal Act
Legal slavery
Jim Crow laws
Coverture
Japanese American internment
Joseph McCarthy
Richard Nixon
I think that any system of ethics that equates legality with doing
what is right, that holds that the
On Sun, Jul 19, 2009 at 1:29 PM, John Williams wrote:
>
> It seems odd to conclude that the way to get other people to behave as
> one thinks they should behave is to coerce them at gunpoint
There are people with guns showing up to demand that you pay your taxes?
That suggests to me that you've
>From past behavior, it does not seem wise to expect politicians to be
unselfish and to make altruistic decisions to help people. Indeed, the
dramatic failure of large centrally planned economies has demonstrated
that it is not wise to even expect politicians to know how to keep
mundane things in a
te that as many as one
| of every four uninsured Americans has been priced out of the health
| insurance market by mandates.
| If mandates do so much harm, then why do they exist? Very few mandates
| have been enacted because of patient pressure. Almost all are the
| result of the lobbying power of speci
On Sun, Jul 19, 2009 at 2:49 AM, John Williams wrote:
>
> And I resent the government forcing me to spend much of my surplus
> income on people like the 87-year-old so that I have much less to help
> people like the child born in Niger.
I believe history has clearly show the foolhardiness of tru
On Sat, Jul 18, 2009 at 11:35 AM, Dan M wrote:
> Agreed. But, where he and I agree and where a John would disagree is that a
> free market can be shaped by the laws within which it resides. For example,
> if you required insurance companies to accept pre-existing conditions, you
> would get rid
On Sat, Jul 18, 2009 at 7:32 AM, Nick Arnett wrote:
> The fundamental truth behind that writing is conveniently ignored by
> champions of "liberty" who insist that "freedom" frees them from a
> community's obligation to organize itself to care for those in need.
>
> It is a strange sort of liberat
> -Original Message-
> From: brin-l-boun...@mccmedia.com [mailto:brin-l-boun...@mccmedia.com] On
> Behalf Of John Williams
> Sent: Saturday, July 18, 2009 12:41 AM
> To: Killer Bs (David Brin et al) Discussion
> Subject: Re: Why not discuss the topic?
> No chutzpah
> -Original Message-
> From: brin-l-boun...@mccmedia.com [mailto:brin-l-boun...@mccmedia.com] On
> Behalf Of Warren Ockrassa
> Sent: Friday, July 17, 2009 10:55 PM
> To: Killer Bs (David Brin et al) Discussion
> Subject: Re: Why not discuss the topic?
>
> On
On Fri, Jul 17, 2009 at 10:20 PM, Charlie Bell wrote:
>
>
> Franklin founded the first one in the States, arguably the first of the
> modern mutuals. But he didn't invent shared or mutualised risk.
>
>
Risk has been mutual forever. John Donne said it well:
No man is an island,
Entire of itself.
Charlie said:
Yeah, that's what I was alluding to with Mediterranean traders.
Guaranteed by Hamurabi (sp?) himself, IIRC.
Oh, okay. And yes, it's mentioned in Hammurabi's "law code" (which was
probably a set of examples of what the king would do or had done in
different circumstances rath
On 18/07/2009, at 5:33 PM, Richard Baker wrote:
Charlie said:
It originated a long time before Benjy. Traders in the
Mediterranean used a form of insurance to indemnify the trader
against loss if the cargo was stolen, and mutualised risk was used
by Chinese traders (who would spread thei
On Sat, Jul 18, 2009 at 12:42 AM, Dave Land wrote:
> Your presumption of the
> freedom to behave this way comes an exorbitant cost to others on this
> list, but you seem to have no problem demanding that we pay that price.
I respect your freedom to choose not to pay "that price". I will not
compl
On Sat, Jul 18, 2009 at 12:44 AM, Doug Pensinger wrote:
> If regulations and restrictions have such a detrimental effect then why do
> other, more restrictive nations have much more efficient and effective
> health care systems?
That is a complicated subject, and I do not believe I cla
Dave said:
Your presumption of the freedom to behave this way comes an
exorbitant cost to others on this
list, but you seem to have no problem demanding that we pay that
price.
Really? And there I was thinking that it was easy to skim or skip
posts that don't interest you, and even dialup
John wrote:
No, it was not. The myriad government restrictions have a significant
> effect on costs.
If regulations and restrictions have such a detrimental effect then why do
other, more restrictive nations have much more efficient and effective
health care systems?
D
On Jul 18, 2009, at 12:20 AM, John Williams wrote:
There are also people who do not seem to know what freedom actually
means. Nor respect, respect enough to understand that each person
knows what is best for themselves.
Evidently, for some people, "freedom" means the right to refuse to
partici
Charlie said:
It originated a long time before Benjy. Traders in the Mediterranean
used a form of insurance to indemnify the trader against loss if the
cargo was stolen, and mutualised risk was used by Chinese traders
(who would spread their cargos across many vessels to lower the
total r
On Fri, Jul 17, 2009 at 11:58 PM, Warren Ockrassa wrote:
> There is nothing you wrote in the last post that makes rational or
> compassionate sense to me. There is nothing I can respond to. We're too
> different.
Everyone is different. That makes the world an interesting and wonderful place.
> A
John:
I just don't live on the same planet that you do, I guess.
There is nothing you wrote in the last post that makes rational or
compassionate sense to me. There is nothing I can respond to. We're
too different.
All I can say is that I'm glad the Libertarians and Ayn Rand
worshippers
urance, but are cafeteria
plans, all-you-can eat.
> Would I be willing to help pay for that? Yes, just as much as I was glad
> that "others" paid to help me learn why I was sneezing so much
I am not arguing against insurance. Far from it, I like and buy
insurance. I am only arguing
of destitution. You're not taking others'
freedom by being given a therapy you could otherwise not possibly
afford. You're just working on the cushion that everyone has paid into
anyway.
Would I be willing to help pay for that? Yes, just as much as I was
glad that "others&
I am not directly taking away someone else's freedom.
>
> ...and that's the point of regulation - to make sure the big operator
> doesn't stiff the little guy's choice.
I can see why you might be emotional about that sort of thing, but the
fact is that the example yo
On 18/07/2009, at 3:14 PM, John Williams wrote:
You seem to have a more restrictive definition of freedom than I do.
My definition of freedom of choice is to be able to choose as I like
as long as I am not directly taking away someone else's freedom.
...and that's the point of regulation - to
On 18/07/2009, at 1:55 PM, Warren Ockrassa wrote:
On Jul 17, 2009, at 8:07 PM, dsummersmi...@comcast.net wrote:
There are arguements for the free market. My Congressman wants a free
market solution, and I respect him because he doesn't pretend facts
don't
exist.
But we have free market s
On Fri, Jul 17, 2009 at 9:48 PM, Warren Ockrassa wrote:
> On Jul 17, 2009, at 9:15 PM, John Williams wrote:
> I guess you've never visited an "herbal" healer then, or someone who used
> "reiki" or "healing touch". You're not prevented from doing so. The free
> market lets you.
Heh, being restrict
On Jul 17, 2009, at 9:15 PM, John Williams wrote:
On Fri, Jul 17, 2009 at 8:55 PM, Warren
Ockrassa wrote:
But we have free market solutions. We've had them for decades.
For healthcare? Free market as in, minimal government restrictions on
what consumers can buy and what providers can sell?
On Fri, Jul 17, 2009 at 8:55 PM, Warren Ockrassa wrote:
>
> But we have free market solutions. We've had them for decades.
For healthcare? Free market as in, minimal government restrictions on
what consumers can buy and what providers can sell? I'd certainly like
to hear about such things.
> The
On Jul 17, 2009, at 8:07 PM, dsummersmi...@comcast.net wrote:
There are arguements for the free market. My Congressman wants a free
market solution, and I respect him because he doesn't pretend facts
don't
exist.
But we have free market solutions. We've had them for decades. And for
many,
On Fri, Jul 17, 2009 at 8:07 PM,
dsummersmi...@comcast.net wrote:
> Health care if one gets seriously ill twice.
I ask again, afford exactly what? Health care is a broad term.
___
http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
guarantee?
I know you are neither stupid nor ignorant. Why don't you converse in a
manner that adresses the ideas presented instead of trying to find a way
not to?
> I have A Modest Proposal on this. The free market would be part of
> evolutionthose who cannot afford healthcare wou
At 07:17 PM Wednesday 4/1/2009, Euan Ritchie wrote:
Reasons not to use HTML email...
http://www1.american.edu/econ/notes/htmlmail.htm
"3. You have no other way to access the character set you require to
communicate with someone using another language*, and yet you wish to
write that person
Reasons not to use HTML email...
http://www1.american.edu/econ/notes/htmlmail.htm
___
http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
y" for quite a while after the lab instrument job. :D
On Dec 23, 2008, at 12:47 PM, Julia Thompson wrote:
> Why does moister air carry odors better?
>
> (This question occurred to me as I was driving through the fairly
> thin but
> thicker-in-spots fog we have at the momen
Why does moister air carry odors better?
(This question occurred to me as I was driving through the fairly thin but
thicker-in-spots fog we have at the moment and in a thicker part of it,
got the unmistakable odor of Cowfield. And when you've had gym class
downwind of a dairy farm, you
On Sat, Dec 6, 2008 at 9:39 PM, Dan M <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> But, I think this recession will hit everyone, and a sinking tide lowers
> all
> boats. I know that investment bankers are nervous now.
Both of them? :-)
Nick
___
http://www.mccmed
rtainly
can't afford to buy those houses, unless they are paid far above
averageand then the company that hires them are at a great
disadvantagewhich is why HP will keep shifting work to Houston's Compaq
campus.
Dan M.
___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
questions. 95% of which have easy answers, 5% of which take some
though, and 1%-2% of which lead to finding flaws that were missed due to
assumptions.
> That is why grad students and their profs all have large repertoire of
> jokes in which the punch-line involves an economist mak
At 06:16 AM Tuesday 12/2/2008, Alberto Monteiro wrote:
>Julia Thompson wrote:
> >
> >> The only place in the USA I know is LA. I think I could live there.
> >
> > See Austin first before you make up your mind. :)
> >
>That was a remote hypothesis, back in Bush I government. Clinton's
>xenophobic
Julia Thompson wrote:
>
>> The only place in the USA I know is LA. I think I could live there.
>
> See Austin first before you make up your mind. :)
>
That was a remote hypothesis, back in Bush I government. Clinton's
xenophobic government closed all doors for foreign workers. Barring
a major c
On Tue, 2 Dec 2008, Alberto Monteiro wrote:
>
> Doug Pensinger wrote:
>>
>> Not by climate. Not by access to a diverse environment (beach in
>> Austin? Mountians?) And by the way, I hate LA and I'd consider
>> Austin before I would LA. Well, maybe...
>>
> The only place in the USA I know is
Doug Pensinger wrote:
>
> Not by climate. Not by access to a diverse environment (beach in
> Austin? Mountians?) And by the way, I hate LA and I'd consider
> Austin before I would LA. Well, maybe...
>
The only place in the USA I know is LA. I think I could live there.
Alberto Monteiro
___
On 29 Nov 2008 at 10:32, Nick Arnett wrote:
> I suspect that what we've seen in oil,
> housing and other bubbles is that we have created a system that amplifies
> fear and greed.
In an essentially unreal market, why are we surprised we have largely
psychological resonance and pos
Dan wrote:
>
> http://www.paloaltoonline.com/com_info/by_the_numbers.php
>
> we see that the median home price in 2006 was 1.4 million. With one of
> those fancy 0% down mortgages and 6% interest (that combination won't be
> seen again for a while), this results in 84k per year in interest paymen
t assume that
markets will either produce optimum levels of output or the best
possible prices.
When you are in a doctoral program in economics, one of the things you
are drilled in is that the assumptions you make in developing your
models are often the most significant factors in the results
Original Message:
-
From: Doug Pensinger [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 1 Dec 2008 18:17:51 -0800
To: brin-l@mccmedia.com
Subject: Re: Wal-Mart is evil, why it must be eradicated
Dan wrote:
> I understand that sentiment, and I admit that there are far more enjoyable
> pla
rise_
> in price of real estate in LA vs. Dallas. Since Dallas grew faster over
> the time period, by your theory, it's prices should rise faster than LA.
LA is maxed out. They're overcrowded. That's why people are building
homes where they shouldn't and they get destroye
On Mon, Dec 1, 2008 at 2:05 PM, pencimen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Because (apologies for bluntness and to those who _do_ like the
> climate) WTF wants to live in Houston (or Dallas)?
Which reminds me of a story I heard recently of somebody who sold their
house here and bought a 5,000 SF ho
Original Message:
-
From: pencimen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 01 Dec 2008 22:05:13 -
To: brin-l@mccmedia.com
Subject: Re: Wal-Mart is evil, why it must be eradicated
"Dan M" wrote:
> The housing bubble was partially due to cash with no place to go.
But,
"Dan M" wrote:
> The housing bubble was partially due to cash with no place to go.
But, much
> of the excess in housing prices was deliberately caused by
homeowners' votes
> against affordable housing in places like California. Why do you
think that
> prices for c
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> Behalf Of Nick Arnett
> Sent: Monday, December 01, 2008 10:34 AM
> To: Killer Bs (David Brin et al) Discussion
> Subject: Re: Wal-Mart is evil, why it must be eradicated
>
> On Mon, Dec
eliberately caused by homeowners'
> votes
> against affordable housing in places like California. Why do you think
> that
> prices for comparable housing in LA are so much more than Houston or
> Dallas?
You have more space. ;-)
When did we vote against affordable hous
Dan M wrote:
>
> Oil is a funny thing; some fields in the Middle East can still
> produce at a cost of under $10/barrel, while the new US oil plays
> (like the subsalt Gulf of Mexico) require much higher oil prices to
> be at all profitable.
>
Here in Brazil we call it "pre-salt" (pré-sal); g
Sorry, I hit send before getting a number
> Since then, demand has taken off. Just look at the last few years, while
> prices have been rising rapidly. World demand was still growing, rising 4%
> between 2004 and 2007, during which time the average price rose
about 75%.
Dan M.
_
partially due to cash with no place to go. But, much
of the excess in housing prices was deliberately caused by homeowners' votes
against affordable housing in places like California. Why do you think that
prices for comparable housing in LA are so much more than Houston or Dallas?
Dan M.
___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
At 09:53 PM Sunday 11/30/2008, John Williams wrote:
>I've never been to North Carolina.
Then you've missed some mighty nice mountain scenery in the western part.
Some People Like The Ocean On The Eastern Side Too Maru
. . . ronn! :)
___
http:
On Sun, Nov 30, 2008 at 6:54 PM, Nick Arnett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 30, 2008 at 5:42 PM, John Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
>
>> What exactly do you mean when you say "free markets reliably regulate
>> prices"?
>
> Exactly what I wrote.
So, meaningless. Or so broad as to hav
On Sun, Nov 30, 2008 at 5:42 PM, John Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 29, 2008 at 10:32 AM, Nick Arnett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > If free markets reliably regulate prices,
>
> What exactly do you mean when you say "free markets reliably regulate
> prices"?
Exactly what
On Sat, Nov 29, 2008 at 10:32 AM, Nick Arnett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> If free markets reliably regulate prices,
What exactly do you mean when you say "free markets reliably regulate prices"?
> Surely neither supply nor demand changed much in such a short
> time.
I don't think there was an
- Original Message -
From: "Nick Arnett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Killer Bs (David Brin et al) Discussion"
Sent: Saturday, November 29, 2008 12:32 PM
Subject: Re: Wal-Mart is evil, why it must be eradicated
> I'll add one thought that keeps comin
At the risk of re-igniting a certain discussion... here's a great column, I
think, by Paul Krugman, about the current economic situation.
http://www.nybooks.com/articles/22151
The most relevant bit:
*How did this second great colossal muddle arise? In the aftermath of the
Great Depression, we re
On Nov 29, 2008, at 7:50 AM, John Williams wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 28, 2008 at 3:46 PM, Dave Land <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Greed-addled shoppers crushed to death a temporary worker who was
>> trying to open the doors for Black Friday sales.
>
> If the store were open 24/7, then there could be
On Fri, Nov 28, 2008 at 3:46 PM, Dave Land <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Greed-addled shoppers crushed to death a temporary worker who was
> trying to open the doors for Black Friday sales.
If the store were open 24/7, then there could be no door-opening stampede.
_
On Sat, 29 Nov 2008, William T Goodall wrote:
>
> On 28 Nov 2008, at 23:46, Dave Land wrote:
>
>>
>> Some on this list have opined that religion is a great poison that
>> kills. I believe that a good deal of the damage done in the _name_ of
>> religion is, in fact, done in the name of greed.
>>
On 28 Nov 2008, at 23:46, Dave Land wrote:
> Folks,
>
> Greed-addled shoppers crushed to death a temporary worker who was
> trying to open the doors for Black Friday sales.
>
> http://budurl.com/jezv
>
> Fscking people:
>
>Kimberly Cribbs, who witnessed the stampede, said shoppers were
>a
Folks,
Greed-addled shoppers crushed to death a temporary worker who was
trying to open the doors for Black Friday sales.
http://budurl.com/jezv
Fscking people:
Kimberly Cribbs, who witnessed the stampede, said shoppers were
acting like "savages."
"When they were saying they h
1 - 100 of 1122 matches
Mail list logo
