Faith Based Idiocy

2007-04-16 Thread William T Goodall
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/04/16/teens_ignore_abstinence/ Teenagers will not refrain from having sex, even if you spend a billion dollars trying to persuade them to keep their trousers zipped and chastity belts locked. This is the conclusion from a six year study by Mathematica Policy

Re: Faith Based Idiocy

2007-04-16 Thread William T Goodall
On 16 Apr 2007, at 19:05, William T Goodall wrote: The abstinence programme has been a central part of the Bush administration's social policy, and the government has poured about a billion dollars into it over the last 10 years. But the research would seem to suggest that the money has not

Re: Faith Based Idiocy

2007-04-16 Thread Alberto Monteiro
William T Goodall wrote: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/04/16/teens_ignore_abstinence/ Teenagers will not refrain from having sex, even if you spend a billion dollars trying to persuade them to keep their trousers zipped and chastity belts locked. Ok, but I don't see how you can

Re: Faith Based Idiocy

2007-04-16 Thread William T Goodall
On 16 Apr 2007, at 19:19, Alberto Monteiro wrote: Ok, but how can these numbers yield the conclusion that the chastity program is _worse_ than sex education? It's exactly the same crap and waste of money. It shows that the idea that non-abstinence sex education encourages youth promiscuity

RE: Idiocy of universal retirement

2005-01-11 Thread God
Maru Dubshinki contributed: Last I heard, SS was not a pension; so apparently they have no problem living off charity. It was you, not me, who suggested giving the excess crops to retirees. ~Maru On Mon, 10 Jan 2005 14:54:35 +0100, God [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Maru spoketh:

Re: Idiocy of universal retirement

2005-01-11 Thread Maru Dubshinki
What, precisely, is the true difference between giving retirees crops/foodstuffs and money (aside from the sheer versatility of money of course.)? They are both charity as far as I can see. ~Maru On Tue, 11 Jan 2005 19:18:05 +0100, God [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Maru Dubshinki contributed:

RE: Idiocy of universal retirement

2005-01-10 Thread God
Maru spoketh: whether it is in money or other financial instruments. I hear that farmers are paid really large sums to deliberately curtail crop production; why not take that wasted money, use it to buy the excess crops and give it to those retirees in some way or other (so they don't

Re: Idiocy of universal retirement

2005-01-10 Thread Maru Dubshinki
Last I heard, SS was not a pension; so apparently they have no problem living off charity. ~Maru On Mon, 10 Jan 2005 14:54:35 +0100, God [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Maru spoketh: whether it is in money or other financial instruments. I hear that farmers are paid really large sums to

Re: Idiocy of universal retirement

2005-01-09 Thread Erik Reuter
On Sun, Jan 09, 2005 at 12:47:27AM -0500, maru wrote: Correct me if I'm wrong Trent, but isn't the whole point of modern society, technology, science, and liberal democracy to reduce the amount of physical misery, mental anguish and sheer drudgery/work a person has to go through I wouldn't

Re: Idiocy of universal retirement

2005-01-09 Thread maru
Erik Reuter wrote: On Sun, Jan 09, 2005 at 12:47:27AM -0500, maru wrote: Correct me if I'm wrong Trent, but isn't the whole point of modern society, technology, science, and liberal democracy to reduce the amount of physical misery, mental anguish and sheer drudgery/work a person has to go

Re: Idiocy of universal retirement

2005-01-09 Thread Erik Reuter
On Sun, Jan 09, 2005 at 11:58:11AM -0500, maru wrote: And Erik, I don't think 120 trillion dollars over 70 years is all that much. That's good. Then you'll have no trouble saving $1 million for your own retirment, since that is about your share of the $120 trillion. By the way, would you mind

Re: Idiocy of universal retirement

2005-01-09 Thread Julia Thompson
On Sun, 9 Jan 2005, Erik Reuter wrote: On Sun, Jan 09, 2005 at 11:58:11AM -0500, maru wrote: And Erik, I don't think 120 trillion dollars over 70 years is all that much. That's good. Then you'll have no trouble saving $1 million for your own retirment, since that is about your share

Re: Idiocy of universal retirement

2005-01-09 Thread maru
Less probably, since they'd share the same shelter. ~Maru Julia Thompson wrote: On Sun, 9 Jan 2005, Erik Reuter wrote: On Sun, Jan 09, 2005 at 11:58:11AM -0500, maru wrote: And Erik, I don't think 120 trillion dollars over 70 years is all that much. That's good. Then you'll have no

Re: Idiocy of universal joint replacement

2005-01-09 Thread Medievalbk
One fine day in the deep deep South The universal joint in the old pickup truck needed replacing. Well, that's easy to do when you have an A-frame overhead engine hoist. Just lift up the entire front end of the truck and set your blocks. Take out the old joint and let the drive shaft

Re: Idiocy of universal retirement

2005-01-08 Thread maru
Correct me if I'm wrong Trent, but isn't the whole point of modern society, technology, science, and liberal democracy to reduce the amount of physical misery, mental anguish and sheer drudgery/work a person has to go through (as opposed to points such as 'for the further glorification of

Re: Idiocy of universal retirement: (was Re: Social Security)

2005-01-06 Thread Erik Reuter
On Thu, Jan 06, 2005 at 12:59:00AM -0700, Trent Shipley wrote: Of course, with ever increasing (and expensive) life qualities and life spans there will be people born in 1976 still collecting their retirement social security in 2075. Andtheir PIA will already have been calculated years

Idiocy of universal retirement: (was Re: Social Security)

2005-01-05 Thread Trent Shipley
On Wednesday 2005-01-05 23:17, Doug Pensinger wrote: Erik wrote: Apparently you don't understand the difference between 2005 and 2075 and 70 years of 1.5% increases. Probably not. What has been the average increase 1935-2005? I agree that Social Security _should be_ a safety net for low

idiocy

2003-03-14 Thread The Fool
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2u=/030313/168/3i6de.htmle=1ncid=9 96 ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Re: idiocy

2003-03-14 Thread Julia Thompson
The Fool wrote: http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2u=/030313/168/3i6de.htmle=1ncid=9 96 http://makeashorterlink.com/?M1A022FC3 And you might have been so kind as to warn that it's disturbing, with blood and stuff. Next time you post a link to a picture with that much blood, do you think

Re: idiocy

2003-03-14 Thread Ronn!Blankenship
At 01:03 PM 3/14/03 -0600, Julia Thompson wrote: The Fool wrote: http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2u=/030313/168/3i6de.htmle=1ncid=9 96 http://makeashorterlink.com/?M1A022FC3 And you might have been so kind as to warn that it's disturbing, with blood and stuff. Next time you post a link

latest patent idiocy

2003-03-07 Thread The Fool
http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/4/29627.html Gateway in 'preference file' patent puzzle By Andrew Orlowski in San Francisco Posted: 07/03/2003 at 08:19 GMT Proof that the US Department of Commerce employs robots to research patent applications finally emerged this week. On Monday,

more patent idiocy

2003-02-06 Thread The Fool
http://news.com.com/2100-1023-983552.html Patent scare hits streaming industry By John Borland Staff Writer, CNET News.com February 6, 2003, 4:00 AM PT Michael Roe, proprietor of the small RadioIO Webcasting station, got a surprise FedEx package this week, containing a notification that he

patents, religion, idiocy, palladium, the usual

2003-01-11 Thread The Fool
Some links I've backlogged: http://www.ami.com/ami/showpress.cfm?PrID=118 http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns3238 http://robertandtim.topcities.com/quiz/christ/christquiz.html http://www.godlessgeeks.com/LINKS/CSAforBush.htm