subject:"Re\: promoting REASON"


On 12/19/2012 6:47 PM, meekerdb wrote:
The people don't have to be armed to overthrow their government.  It 
depends on the culture; but revolutions were successful in the USSR, 
Poland, India, and South Africa even though the people were not 
armed.  Violent revolutions very often lead to autocratic, 
militaristic rule (the U.S. is almost an exception).  Non-violent 
revolutions, if possible, have better outcomes.


Brent


Words are powerful weapons! All that is required is the proper 
weaponization process.


--
Onward!

Stephen


--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.

Re: promoting REASON


On 12/19/2012 5:01 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote:


So, basically, we are just screwed. OK! ;-)


At least the super-rich will have higher numbers in their bank 
accounts. That will make the loss of civilization for the other 6. 
billion people all worthwhile ;)


So, who is handing out pitchforks and torches?

--
Onward!

Stephen

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.

Re: promoting REASON

On 12/19/2012 1:38 PM, Stephen P. King wrote:

On 12/19/2012 3:29 PM, meekerdb wrote:

On 12/19/2012 9:53 AM, Roger Clough wrote:

Hi Craig Weinberg
OK, govts can finally fail, when the people find that
they can legislate their own welfare.

Or when the people realize that their government has just become a tool of the rich and
powerful to increase their wealth and power; in which case the people revolt and
overthrow the government (c.f. Thomas Paine).

Brent
--

Unless the population is disarmed

The people don't have to be armed to overthrow their government. It depends on the
culture; but revolutions were successful in the USSR, Poland, India, and South Africa even
though the people were not armed. Violent revolutions very often lead to autocratic,
militaristic rule (the U.S. is almost an exception). Non-violent revolutions, if
possible, have better outcomes.

Brent

and brainwashed into blindly accepting all that is told them by said (tool of the
elites) government. :_(

--
Onward!

Stephen

No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2013.0.2805 / Virus Database: 2637/5969 - Release Date: 12/18/12

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything
List" group.

To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.

Re: promoting REASON



On Wednesday, December 19, 2012 6:13:20 PM UTC-5, Brent wrote:
>
>  On 12/19/2012 2:01 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote: 
>
>  But it isn't just money-under-the-table and campaign funding that 
>> corrupts; it is also a huge think-tank industry and media empire that 
>> supports politicians who vote to allow mergers and tax breaks and special 
>> regulations that, down the road, result in corporations that really are 
>> too-big-to-fail.
>>
>> Brent
>>
>>
>> So, basically, we are just screwed. OK! ;-)
>>  
>
> At least the super-rich will have higher numbers in their bank accounts. 
> That will make the loss of civilization for the other 6. billion people 
> all worthwhile ;)
>  
>
>
> No need for despair.  Democracy has worked in the past.  Anti-trust laws 
> were passed.  The Saving & Loan scams were outlawed.  The USSR was 
> overthrown.  Even China has become less ideological.
>

True. There is always hope for a surprise. They seem to come around sooner 
or later...
 

>
> Brent
>  

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/everything-list/-/R9kowQ9nOKkJ.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.

Re: promoting REASON


On 12/19/2012 2:01 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote:



But it isn't just money-under-the-table and campaign funding that corrupts; 
it is
also a huge think-tank industry and media empire that supports politicians 
who vote
to allow mergers and tax breaks and special regulations that, down the 
road, result
in corporations that really are too-big-to-fail.

Brent


So, basically, we are just screwed. OK! ;-)


At least the super-rich will have higher numbers in their bank accounts. That will make 
the loss of civilization for the other 6. billion people all worthwhile ;)


No need for despair.  Democracy has worked in the past.  Anti-trust laws were passed.  The 
Saving & Loan scams were outlawed.  The USSR was overthrown.  Even China has become less 
ideological.


Brent

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.

Re: promoting REASON



On Wednesday, December 19, 2012 5:15:28 PM UTC-5, Stephen Paul King wrote:
>
>  On 12/19/2012 4:34 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
>  
>
>
> On Wednesday, December 19, 2012 4:30:17 PM UTC-5, Stephen Paul King wrote: 
>>
>> On 12/19/2012 2:43 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote: 
>> > All markets become first-come first-serve pyramid schemes by 
>> definition. 
>>
>>  And this means? What is the implication? 
>>
>
> That policies based on the assumption that markets will police themselves 
> is a catastrophic failure. The invisible hand is really the ignored boot 
> stomping on a human face forever.
>  
>  
>  
> Such a pessimistic view!
>

I get to be right or I get to be pleasantly surprised. I win either way. 
Plus I don't have to pretend that we are doing anything right or ignore the 
mountain of evidence to the contrary. It's comfortable.

 

> -- 
> Onward!
>
> Stephen
>
>  

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/everything-list/-/nh3RkKh27ZgJ.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.

Re: promoting REASON


On 12/19/2012 4:34 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote:



On Wednesday, December 19, 2012 4:30:17 PM UTC-5, Stephen Paul King 
wrote:


On 12/19/2012 2:43 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
> All markets become first-come first-serve pyramid schemes by
definition.

 And this means? What is the implication?


That policies based on the assumption that markets will police 
themselves is a catastrophic failure. The invisible hand is really the 
ignored boot stomping on a human face forever.





Such a pessimistic view!

--
Onward!

Stephen

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.

Re: promoting REASON


On 12/19/2012 3:55 PM, meekerdb wrote:
That's because the federal government was the instrument of freeing 
the slaves, over turning Jim Crow, giving women the vote and equal 
rights.  No corporation ever supported personal or civil rights - the 
only rights they ever support are the right to pollute, to hire and 
fire, to discriminate, and not to pay taxes.  The only libertarians I 
respect are those that oppose corporatism as well as statism.


Brent
"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism, since it is the
merger of state and corporate power."
 --- Benito Mussolini.


Good point!

--
Onward!

Stephen


--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.

Re: promoting REASON



On Wednesday, December 19, 2012 4:56:43 PM UTC-5, Stephen Paul King wrote:
>
>  On 12/19/2012 3:50 PM, meekerdb wrote:
>  
> On 12/19/2012 11:08 AM, Stephen P. King wrote: 
>
> On 12/19/2012 1:42 PM, meekerdb wrote:
>  
> On 12/19/2012 6:54 AM, Roger Clough wrote: 
>
> Hi Craig Weinberg 
>  
> The difference between corporations and the govt
> is that corps have to make a profit or they fail.
>
>
> Or they get the government to give them breaks because they're too big to 
> fail.
>
> Brent
>
>
> Hi Brent,
>
> What if the corps where allowed to fail on their own as market forces 
> require? 
>
>
> It would be very bad for the economy and a lot of working level people - 
> so many that the corporation are, with justification, considered 'too big 
> to fail'.
>
> ISTM that corporations use government as a means to overcome normal market 
> forces and thus are such a problem. Fundamentally, it is corruption within 
> government is the main source of our problems.
>
>
> But it isn't just money-under-the-table and campaign funding that 
> corrupts; it is also a huge think-tank industry and media empire that 
> supports politicians who vote to allow mergers and tax breaks and special 
> regulations that, down the road, result in corporations that really are 
> too-big-to-fail.
>
> Brent
>
>
> So, basically, we are just screwed. OK! ;-)
>

At least the super-rich will have higher numbers in their bank accounts. 
That will make the loss of civilization for the other 6. billion people 
all worthwhile ;)
 

> -- 
> Onward!
>
> Stephen
>
>  

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/everything-list/-/iu_mvN7oKhQJ.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.

Re: promoting REASON


On 12/19/2012 3:50 PM, meekerdb wrote:

On 12/19/2012 11:08 AM, Stephen P. King wrote:

On 12/19/2012 1:42 PM, meekerdb wrote:

On 12/19/2012 6:54 AM, Roger Clough wrote:

Hi Craig Weinberg
The difference between corporations and the govt
is that corps have to make a profit or they fail.


Or they get the government to give them breaks because they're too 
big to fail.


Brent


Hi Brent,

What if the corps where allowed to fail on their own as market 
forces require? 


It would be very bad for the economy and a lot of working level people 
- so many that the corporation are, with justification, considered 
'too big to fail'.


ISTM that corporations use government as a means to overcome normal 
market forces and thus are such a problem. Fundamentally, it is 
corruption within government is the main source of our problems.


But it isn't just money-under-the-table and campaign funding that 
corrupts; it is also a huge think-tank industry and media empire that 
supports politicians who vote to allow mergers and tax breaks and 
special regulations that, down the road, result in corporations that 
really are too-big-to-fail.


Brent


So, basically, we are just screwed. OK! ;-)

--
Onward!

Stephen

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.

Re: promoting REASON


On 12/19/2012 3:29 PM, meekerdb wrote:

On 12/19/2012 9:53 AM, Roger Clough wrote:

Hi Craig Weinberg
OK, govts can finally fail, when the people find that
they can legislate their own welfare.


Or when the people realize that their government has just become a 
tool of the rich and powerful to increase their wealth and power; in 
which case the people revolt and overthrow the government (c.f. Thomas 
Paine).


Brent
--


Unless the population is disarmed and brainwashed into blindly 
accepting all that is told them by said (tool of the elites) 
government.  :_(


--
Onward!

Stephen

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.

Re: promoting REASON



On Wednesday, December 19, 2012 4:30:17 PM UTC-5, Stephen Paul King wrote:
>
> On 12/19/2012 2:43 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote: 
> > All markets become first-come first-serve pyramid schemes by definition. 
>
>  And this means? What is the implication? 
>

That policies based on the assumption that markets will police themselves 
is a catastrophic failure. The invisible hand is really the ignored boot 
stomping on a human face forever.
 

>
> -- 
> Onward! 
>
> Stephen 
>
>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/everything-list/-/6z830eU_3R0J.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.

Re: promoting REASON


On 12/19/2012 2:43 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote:

All markets become first-come first-serve pyramid schemes by definition.


And this means? What is the implication?

--
Onward!

Stephen


--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.

Re: promoting REASON

On 12/19/2012 11:12 AM, Stephen P. King wrote:

On 12/19/2012 1:46 PM, meekerdb wrote:

On 12/19/2012 6:58 AM, Roger Clough wrote:

Hi Craig Weinberg
Conservatives don't want NO govt.
They want minimal govt.

I think you're confused; that's Libertarians. Conservatives always vote for more
government control over individual behavior and more money for the military (that
protects their world wide business interests).

It's the far left (the occupy movement, who are anarchists)
that want no govt.

That's why I think there should be a left/libertarian alliance for personal liberty and
limited government.

Brent

Hi Brent,

I wish you where correct, but the facts tell us that the left is incapable of not
seeing the State and thus government as its Deity and almighty benefactor.

That's because the federal government was the instrument of freeing the slaves, over
turning Jim Crow, giving women the vote and equal rights. No corporation ever supported
personal or civil rights - the only rights they ever support are the right to pollute, to
hire and fire, to discriminate, and not to pay taxes. The only libertarians I respect are
those that oppose corporatism as well as statism.

Brent
"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism, since it is the
merger of state and corporate power."
--- Benito Mussolini.

Re: promoting REASON


On 12/19/2012 11:08 AM, Stephen P. King wrote:

On 12/19/2012 1:42 PM, meekerdb wrote:

On 12/19/2012 6:54 AM, Roger Clough wrote:

Hi Craig Weinberg
The difference between corporations and the govt
is that corps have to make a profit or they fail.


Or they get the government to give them breaks because they're too big to fail.

Brent


Hi Brent,

What if the corps where allowed to fail on their own as market forces require? 


It would be very bad for the economy and a lot of working level people - so many that the 
corporation are, with justification, considered 'too big to fail'.


ISTM that corporations use government as a means to overcome normal market forces and 
thus are such a problem. Fundamentally, it is corruption within government is the main 
source of our problems.


But it isn't just money-under-the-table and campaign funding that corrupts; it is also a 
huge think-tank industry and media empire that supports politicians who vote to allow 
mergers and tax breaks and special regulations that, down the road, result in corporations 
that really are too-big-to-fail.


Brent

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.

Re: promoting REASON


On 12/19/2012 9:53 AM, Roger Clough wrote:

Hi Craig Weinberg
OK, govts can finally fail, when the people find that
they can legislate their own welfare.


Or when the people realize that their government has just become a tool of the rich and 
powerful to increase their wealth and power; in which case the people revolt and overthrow 
the government (c.f. Thomas Paine).


Brent

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.

Re: promoting REASON



On Wednesday, December 19, 2012 2:08:20 PM UTC-5, Stephen Paul King wrote:
>
>  On 12/19/2012 1:42 PM, meekerdb wrote:
>  
> On 12/19/2012 6:54 AM, Roger Clough wrote: 
>
> Hi Craig Weinberg 
>  
> The difference between corporations and the govt
> is that corps have to make a profit or they fail.
>
>
> Or they get the government to give them breaks because they're too big to 
> fail.
>
> Brent
>
>
> Hi Brent,
>
> What if the corps where allowed to fail on their own as market forces 
> require? ISTM that corporations use government as a means to overcome 
> normal market forces and thus are such a problem. 
>

Unfortunately 'normal market forces' are a Utopian fantasy. All markets 
become first-come first-serve pyramid schemes by definition.

 

> Fundamentally, it is corruption within government is the main source of 
> our problems.
>

The smaller the government is in relation to the corps who corrupt it, the 
more corrupt it is going to be. Right?

Craig
 

>
> -- 
> Onward!
>
> Stephen
>
>  

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/everything-list/-/TARwVQYaiu0J.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.

Re: promoting REASON


On 12/19/2012 2:16 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:



2012/12/19 Stephen P. King >


On 12/19/2012 1:46 PM, meekerdb wrote:

On 12/19/2012 6:58 AM, Roger Clough wrote:

Hi Craig Weinberg
Conservatives don't want NO govt.
They want minimal govt.


I think you're confused; that's Libertarians. Conservatives
always vote for more government control over individual behavior
and more money for the military (that protects their world wide
business interests).


It's the far left (the occupy movement, who are anarchists)
that want no govt.


That's why I think there should be a left/libertarian alliance
for personal liberty and limited government.

Brent

-- 

Hi Brent,

I wish you where correct, but the facts tell us that the left
is incapable of not seeing the State and thus government as its
Deity and almighty benefactor.


Yes and anarchism is not a left movement in your universe maybe... 
Also for Roger, please don't confuse anarchism with anomie.


Quentin

Dear Quentin,

Could you propose a rough and ready definition of "left" and 
"right" so that we can align our ideas better?


--
Onward!

Stephen

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.

Re: promoting REASON

2012-12-19 Thread Quentin Anciaux

2012/12/19 Stephen P. King 

>  On 12/19/2012 1:46 PM, meekerdb wrote:
>
> On 12/19/2012 6:58 AM, Roger Clough wrote:
>
> Hi Craig Weinberg
>
> Conservatives don't want NO govt.
> They want minimal govt.
>
>
> I think you're confused; that's Libertarians.  Conservatives always vote
> for more government control over individual behavior and more money for the
> military (that protects their world wide business interests).
>
>
>  It's the far left (the occupy movement, who are anarchists)
> that want no govt.
>
>
> That's why I think there should be a left/libertarian alliance for
> personal liberty and limited government.
>
> Brent
>
> --
>
> Hi Brent,
>
> I wish you where correct, but the facts tell us that the left is
> incapable of not seeing the State and thus government as its Deity and
> almighty benefactor.
>

Yes and anarchism is not a left movement in your universe maybe... Also for
Roger, please don't confuse anarchism with anomie.

Quentin


>
> --
> Onward!
>
> Stephen
>
>  --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Everything List" group.
> To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
>



-- 
All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.

Re: promoting REASON


On 12/19/2012 1:46 PM, meekerdb wrote:

On 12/19/2012 6:58 AM, Roger Clough wrote:

Hi Craig Weinberg
Conservatives don't want NO govt.
They want minimal govt.


I think you're confused; that's Libertarians.  Conservatives always 
vote for more government control over individual behavior and more 
money for the military (that protects their world wide business 
interests).



It's the far left (the occupy movement, who are anarchists)
that want no govt.


That's why I think there should be a left/libertarian alliance for 
personal liberty and limited government.


Brent

--

Hi Brent,

I wish you where correct, but the facts tell us that the left is 
incapable of not seeing the State and thus government as its Deity and 
almighty benefactor.


--
Onward!

Stephen

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.

Re: promoting REASON


On 12/19/2012 1:42 PM, meekerdb wrote:

On 12/19/2012 6:54 AM, Roger Clough wrote:

Hi Craig Weinberg
The difference between corporations and the govt
is that corps have to make a profit or they fail.


Or they get the government to give them breaks because they're too big 
to fail.


Brent


Hi Brent,

What if the corps where allowed to fail on their own as market 
forces require? ISTM that corporations use government as a means to 
overcome normal market forces and thus are such a problem. 
Fundamentally, it is corruption within government is the main source of 
our problems.


--
Onward!

Stephen

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.

Re: promoting REASON


On 12/19/2012 6:58 AM, Roger Clough wrote:

Hi Craig Weinberg
Conservatives don't want NO govt.
They want minimal govt.


I think you're confused; that's Libertarians.  Conservatives always vote for more 
government control over individual behavior and more money for the military (that protects 
their world wide business interests).



It's the far left (the occupy movement, who are anarchists)
that want no govt.


That's why I think there should be a left/libertarian alliance for personal liberty and 
limited government.


Brent

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.

Re: promoting REASON


On 12/19/2012 6:54 AM, Roger Clough wrote:

Hi Craig Weinberg
The difference between corporations and the govt
is that corps have to make a profit or they fail.


Or they get the government to give them breaks because they're too big to fail.

Brent

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.

Re: Re: Re: Re: promoting REASON

2012-12-19 Thread Roger Clough

Hi Craig Weinberg 

OK, govts can finally fail, when the people find that
they can legislate their own welfare.

[Roger Clough], [rclo...@verizon.net]
12/19/2012 
"Forever is a long time, especially near the end." -Woody Allen

- Receiving the following content - 
From: Craig Weinberg 
Receiver: everything-list 
Time: 2012-12-19, 10:56:37
Subject: Re: Re: Re: promoting REASON

On Wednesday, December 19, 2012 9:54:32 AM UTC-5, rclough wrote:
Hi Craig Weinberg 

The difference between corporations and the govt
is that corps have to make a profit or they fail.

Govt never fails. 

Governments fail all of the time.

The idea of American democracy was to factor that in and create a system which 
is fault tolerant, highly available, and distributively redundant (to borrow 
the jargon of my field). 

You have to understand that corporations exist because governments do all of 
the heavy lifting for them free of charge. It educates workers, maintains law, 
enforces contracts, maintains roads, ports, electric grid, etc... 

Without that immense organization underwriting business, corporations are 
nothing but cartels vying for absolute monopoly for various commodities.

Craig

[Roger Clough], [rcl...@verizon.net]
12/19/2012 
"Forever is a long time, especially near the end." -Woody Allen

- Receiving the following content - 
From: Craig Weinberg 
Receiver: everything-list 
Time: 2012-12-18, 11:54:11
Subject: Re: Re: promoting REASON

On Tuesday, December 18, 2012 10:34:14 AM UTC-5, rclough wrote: 
Hi Craig Weinberg   

Party politics will soon end. 

The two parties of the future (next year if even that) 
will be (a) those who want to cut the debt and 
(b) those who don't.   

That's what's happened to much of europe. 

Eh, even that will be a lie. I would assume that party politics will continue 
in a less overt way is all. Oligarchy re-branded. 

As far as the pipe dream of increasing individual liberty by reducing the power 
of government, can't you see that unconstitutional Corporate Feudalism will 
fill the vacuum before you can say Habeus Corpus? You think that Monsanto is 
going to give you a constitution? Hahahahahahahahahahhahahahhahahahah.

Craig

[Roger Clough], [rcl...@verizon.net] 
12/18/2012   
"Forever is a long time, especially near the end." -Woody Allen 

- Receiving the following content -   
From: Craig Weinberg   
Receiver: everything-list   
Time: 2012-12-17, 19:08:17 
Subject: Re: promoting REASON 

On Monday, December 17, 2012 5:57:40 PM UTC-5, Stephen Paul King wrote: 
On 12/17/2012 3:05 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote:   
> Now that I know that Conservatism is based on preserving the value of   
> fear, it makes sense that the arguments tend to jump unexplainably   
> from "hey, why is that one guy hogging all of the money?" to "The only   
> alternative is 'everyone will die'. If we weren't afraid of dying in   
> mass graves, what would be a more sensible way of governing a   
> prosperous state?   
Dear Craig,   

 At some point I hope that you will understand that I am not   
promoting a brand of politics. I am promoting REASON, that with makes us   
Sapient, not that which makes us D. or R. or L. or G. or whatever other   
brand of politic one might happen to like.   

I don't doubt that, and in theory I welcome Conservative views, except that in 
reality I'm not able to see the reasonable part of them. 

 Preserving the value of fear. Well, umm, yes. Being able to track   
what is truly scary (will kill you if given a chance) and being able to   
ignore the not-so-scary (might kill you if you bother it), seems to give   
a evolutionary advantage. Consider an evolutionary toy ecosystem. If we   
introduce a mutation that makes all stimuli "scary" or makes stimuli   
scary by some random amount, what happens to average survival?   
Predictability of actions would be degraded, this implies a detrimental   
effect on survival. How will you find food in a randomly or super scary   
world?   

But the position the US is in now, of being the only global superpower with a 
larger military than at least the next ten put together puts fear at the bottom 
of the list of important considerations. We should be looking at how making the 
US quality of life the envy of the world, not making into a prison. 

Craig 

--   
Onward!   

Stephen   

--   
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group. 
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/everything-list/-/_wNgkrj-t90J. 
To post to this group, send email to everyth...@googlegroups.com. 
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
everything-li...@googlegroups.com. 
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. 

-- 
You received this m

Re: Re: Re: promoting REASON