 | | Re: Curious, if true
|
|
(...) And by choosing that, are you not "taking care of yourself"? ;-) (...) By "taking care" I do not mean legislate or coerce. Sometimes a simple "WAKE UP!" scream is what's missing so that someone realizes there may be something wrong. Just the (...) (23 years ago, 5-Mar-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: A hypothetical economics question... (long)
|
|
(...) I think that there is a misconception about the role debt plays in the economy and what interest actually is. Here is some basic financial theory (A good way to get this is to have you company pay for you to get an MBA (U of Michigan) :-)) (...) (23 years ago, 5-Mar-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The "Unknown" Santa Fe
|
|
(...) Never let it be said you can't learn something from LUGNET. I always thought one of the meanings of 'inferred' meant 'related to', like the inherent properties thereof. such as 'I thought that this particular thing inferred that'--read as--'I (...) (23 years ago, 5-Mar-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The "Unknown" Santa Fe
|
|
(...) By the way, an "inference" is traditionally made by the person who's doing the reading/listening/interpreting. You're thinking of "implied," which is done by the person/thing making the statement. Person A: Are you implying that I'm stingy? (...) (23 years ago, 5-Mar-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: A hypothetical economics question...
|
|
(...) leave (...) That's true to some extent. But isn't it changing the rules mid-game every time new laws are passed? Obviously we're discussing a much larger change than just adjusting our property tax rate up .25% to pay for school renovation or (...) (23 years ago, 5-Mar-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The "Unknown" Santa Fe
|
|
(...) Few are more anal than I when it comes to the proliferation of such apparent pseudo-words as this, but the burden of precedence is against us. According to www.yourdictionary.com the word "attendee" first saw use in 1937, so if we're (note (...) (23 years ago, 5-Mar-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The "Unknown" Santa Fe
|
|
(...) Not that I'm an expert on grammar, but my entire life 'begs the question' meant to expound on the previous thought with a question... let me see if I can make a Daveish scenario... Person 1 "I think that your interest in LEGO is too extreme." (...) (23 years ago, 5-Mar-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The "Unknown" Santa Fe
|
|
(...) ...there's an apostrophe in "we're" when used as an abbreviation of "we are". I always wondered about the title of that New Zealand film "Once Were Warriors", but apparently it is intended to be the past participle of 'are', as the line is (...) (23 years ago, 5-Mar-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: A hypothetical economics question...
|
|
(...) If they are, then yes, but if the losing side suddenly decides it doesn't like the rules and wants to change in mid-game, you can bet it won't sit well with the side that's ahead. And no one will take the new rules seriously if they are (...) (23 years ago, 5-Mar-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Technic MOTM needs a new name.
|
|
(...) As long as Tim Courtney apparently wrote the mail on behalf of LDraw.org, I don't think it is a personal mail. I think it is perfectly acceptable to bring it's content up in a public newsgroup. I would have tended to agree with you, had the (...) (23 years ago, 5-Mar-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
