To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.off-topic.debateOpen lugnet.off-topic.debate in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Off-Topic / Debate / *14591 (-10)
  Re: All important (was: Amtrak Told to Plan Liquidation)
 
(...) Can you be more specific? If passengers didn't want to travel by air there would be no problem, would there? There'd be no airlines! Why shouldn't airlines shoulder the whole cost? (note that in a free market there is no difference between (...) (23 years ago, 10-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: More on Moral Relativism
 
(...) Under duress? Not great. Voluntarily? Really bad. (insofar as a system of morals can have feelings... :-) ) (23 years ago, 10-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: All important (was: Amtrak Told to Plan Liquidation)
 
(...) Why shouldn't we? Why should someone who rarely or never flies pay so that folks like Larry can fly once a week or more (not sure how often Larry flies, but he's a good example of a very frequent flyer here)? If aircraft are truly that (...) (23 years ago, 10-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: All important (was: Amtrak Told to Plan Liquidation)
 
(...) Sorry if this is a repost. I lost my cookies somewhere. Anywho... I don't think we got to closure on this (or much of anything else, lately) so don't be sorry. I am not sure I follow this argument. You are going to have to elaborate. I will (...) (23 years ago, 10-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Amtrak Told to Plan Liquidation
 
(...) Just as our government would not allow the demise of Ansett airlines - especially just before a federal election! Be interesting to see what our PM does now he's been re-elected... (URL) (23 years ago, 10-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: All important (was: Amtrak Told to Plan Liquidation)
 
(...) Sorry for bringing it up again, but this is exactly why I think it's unfair to lumber plane passengers with the entire cost of "global security". ROSCO (23 years ago, 10-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: More on Moral Relativism
 
(...) to (...) Sure, that'd be pretty impossible, I think. However some rather large evils have been left un-righted, due to political pressure. I just think the assertion that the US is "good" doesn't hold water. They're good when it suits them. (...) (23 years ago, 10-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: More on Moral Relativism
 
(...) How does your system of morals feel about your actually assisting evil because to not do so would be painful? Chris (23 years ago, 10-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Amtrak Told to Plan Liquidation
 
(...) As someone that doesn't think rail has gotten a fair shake at the feeding trough (rail owns its own right of way, which it pays tax on, trucks pay pretty small fuel taxes (5000 a year per truck does not buy you a lot of highway) and nothing (...) (23 years ago, 10-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Wanted
 
(...) Oh, sorry, I think I took it the wrong way. :-/ but I wanted to point out that (...) oh ok, again, my bad, sorry bout' that! And I'd like to mention, especially to those that think that I'd be (...) Keep trying! It takes a while,(took me a (...) (23 years ago, 10-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)


Next Page:  5 more | 10 more | 20 more

Redisplay Messages:  All | Compact

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR