Title: RE: [PEN-L:33822] Re: RE: Re: the pen-l fairness doctrine
Yoshie writes:
For starters, avoid using such ungainly words as incentivize
straight out of the book of CorporateSpeak.
I wrote: right. In addition, I'm afraid the word incentive is inextricably bound with individualistic
At 05:44 PM 01/13/2003 -0800, you wrote:
Don't ever insult my intelligence again by deigning to presume how to
determine how others should speak about the issues of the day. Your
pathetically tiring authoritarianism is showing..
Now, nowincentivize is a butt-ugly word. She just said
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 01/13/03 11:41 AM
I have been asked about the contradiction between collecting royalties on my book
questioning
intellectual property. I answer that I did not really write the book. I collaborated
with earlier writers; I could not have done what I did without my computer,
I also wonder what earned ever dollar means. I have been asked about
the contradiction between collecting royalties on my book questioning
intellectual property. I answer that I did not really write the book. I
collaborated with earlier writers; I could not have done what I did
without my
From: Bill Lear [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Monday, January 13, 2003 at 06:59:36 (-0800) Devine, James writes:
...
By Larry Paquette
...
However, I feel no need to defend my position. Over the years I have
worked
hard and earned every dollar of the obscene wealth I am accused of
hoarding.
This is
- Original Message -
From: Bill Lear [EMAIL PROTECTED]
This is a perfect piece of propaganda with Paquette, apparently
unwittingly, serving as a proxy for the truly rich --- how they must
be applauding him.
Bill
==
[for another take, there's the below...]
On Monday, January 13, 2003 at 11:52:55 (-0800) Ian Murray writes:
...
washingtonpost.com
A Big 'Thank You' To the Wealthy
Monday, January 13, 2003; Page A20
Last week my wife and I braved the inclement weather and went to the
National Gallery of Art to view the trompe l'oeil exhibition.
As we
Bill Lear wrote:
Another truckload of crap. We have created princes and when they
bestow us with a trickle of benefactions, our knees weaken in their
divine presence. It would be more accurate to say God damn the rich.
How much richer we would all be without them.
How can I accept a doctrine
How can I accept a doctrine which sets up as its bibleĀan obsolete
economic textbook which I know to be not only scientifically
erroneous but without interest or application for the modern world?
How can I adopt a creed which, preferring the mud to the fish,
exalts the boorish proletariat
- Original Message -
From: Bill Lear [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Another truckload of crap. We have created princes and when they
bestow us with a trickle of benefactions, our knees weaken in their
divine presence. It would be more accurate to say God damn the rich.
How much richer we would
On Monday, January 13, 2003 at 15:47:38 (-0500) Doug Henwood writes:
Bill Lear wrote:
Another truckload of crap. We have created princes and when they
bestow us with a trickle of benefactions, our knees weaken in their
divine presence. It would be more accurate to say God damn the rich.
How
On Monday, January 13, 2003 at 13:11:45 (-0800) Ian Murray writes:
- Original Message -
From: Bill Lear [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Another truckload of crap. We have created princes and when they
bestow us with a trickle of benefactions, our knees weaken in their
divine presence. It would be
At 12:59 PM 01/13/2003 -0800, you wrote:
Ha! I saw a bumper sticker the other day that read, Religion is what
keeps the poor from killing the rich.
Oh, I thought it was low self-esteem that did it.
Joanna
Bill Lear wrote:
Another truckload of crap. We have created princes and when they
bestow us with a trickle of benefactions, our knees weaken in their
divine presence. It would be more accurate to say God damn the rich.
How much richer we would all be without them.
In a footnote to
At 02:45 PM 01/13/2003 -0600, you wrote:
Rich people and their money seem to be a topic of constant criticism
these days. I can only exclaim, Thank God for the rich. How much poorer
we would all be without them!
Well, you know, they get to the point where they realize that they can't
take it
- Original Message -
From: Bill Lear [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You do the emotionally hard and intellectually easy work of getting
your ass in front of people and talking to them, educating them (I
prefer the didactic mode to that of storyteller, incidentally). I'll
bet Doug Henwood alone
Ian is correct. If I can make a student turn left after a single class,
the next instructor can probably undo what good I have done. Follow up
is essential. Only after people become actively engaged is the good
effect likely to take hold.
On Mon, Jan 13, 2003 at 01:43:05PM -0800, Ian Murray
Ian Murray wrote:
- Original Message -
The one speaker enlightening a passive audience is a horrible method
for organizing. One need only think of all those citizens sitting in
church pews to realize this. It's not the content alone, but the form of
communicating that has
On Monday, January 13, 2003 at 13:43:05 (-0800) Ian Murray writes:
- Original Message -
From: Bill Lear [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You do the emotionally hard and intellectually easy work of getting
your ass in front of people and talking to them, educating them (I
prefer the didactic mode to
- Original Message -
From: Bill Lear [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I don't agree. I am working with a religious group of peace activists
who have been amazed at the things I tell them about how our political
process works and who are hungry for more information --- they even
want me to write a
At 04:15 PM 01/13/2003 -0600, you wrote:
Pissed at whom? A) At a government that is merely handmaiden to those
with real power? B) At a few corporate criminals who got caught with
their hands in the cookie jar? C) Or at the entire structure of greed
which ramrods injustice down their throats
Ian Murray wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Bill Lear [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I don't agree. I am working with a religious group of peace activists
who have been amazed at the things I tell them about how our political
process works and who are hungry for more information ---
joanna bujes wrote:
At 04:15 PM 01/13/2003 -0600, you wrote:
Pissed at whom? A) At a government that is merely handmaiden to those
with real power? B) At a few corporate criminals who got caught with
their hands in the cookie jar? C) Or at the entire structure of greed
which ramrods
- Original Message -
From: Yoshie Furuhashi [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For starters, avoid using such ungainly words as incentivize
straight out of the book of CorporateSpeak.
==
I don't use that word anywhere other than this list and I was addressing
an issue that was
come on you two. you know better than this.
On Mon, Jan 13, 2003 at 05:44:38PM -0800, Ian Murray wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Yoshie Furuhashi [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For starters, avoid using such ungainly words as incentivize
straight out of the book of CorporateSpeak.
Title: RE: [PEN-L:33811] Re: the pen-l fairness doctrine
someone wrote:
Ok, but how do we tell stories to incentivize the working class
[each other] to understand that the current regime of wealth production is making life miserable for countless living beings on this planet,...
Yoshie
- Original Message -
From: Devine, James [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Yoshie writes:
For starters, avoid using such ungainly words as incentivize
straight out of the book of CorporateSpeak.
right. In addition, I'm afraid the word incentive is inextricably
bound
with individualistic ideas of
Yoshie Furuhashi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
- Original Message -From: "Devine, James" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Yoshie writes: For starters, avoid using such ungainly words as "incentivize" straight out of the book of CorporateSpeak.
When ideas like those traded on the pen-l list reach the the
28 matches
Mail list logo
