 | | Re: Supply-Side Economics? The Evidence Says No!
|
|
--snip-- (...) But that's true in any developed country at any time since WWII. The standard of living of the developed world has increased consistently (albeit faster or slower at times) because science and technology has allowed it to. It's a true (...) (18 years ago, 16-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Supply-Side Economics? The Evidence Says No!
|
|
(...) How's that math working for you lately, Dave!? Looks like half of perfect from here the obstructed-view seats.... (...) Well, that certainly was easy....:-) (...) But it is the metric by which we have consistently gauged the economy. I realize (...) (18 years ago, 16-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Supply-Side Economics? The Evidence Says No!
|
|
(...) Hey, I'll take that. That's 25% of perfect, after all. (...) That's right--it's a disastrous policy divorced from reality and favored only by the very wealthy who understand its implications and the not-so-wealthy who don't. End of debate! (...) (18 years ago, 16-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Supply-Side Economics? The Evidence Says No!
|
|
(...) I give your weak attempt at humor a 2.5 out of 5 (whoopie-cushions). As for the study, I was under the impression that the whole debate WRT supply-side economics was all but over. It worked fabulously for Reagan (spending did him in). It is (...) (18 years ago, 16-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Supply-Side Economics? The Evidence Says No!
|
|
(...) All things considered, I'm more annoyed that you didn't riff on my rating system than that you questioned the methodology of the study! Dave! (18 years ago, 16-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Supply-Side Economics? The Evidence Says No!
|
|
(...) While I suspect the conclusions of the study are correct it seems like a highly flawed study from that write-up. For one thing calling Australia a low tax country is a little odd considering that the top rate was about 50% until very recently. (...) (18 years ago, 16-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Supply-Side Economics? The Evidence Says No!
|
|
Read about it (URL) in Scientific American. It's been clear since at least the time of Reagan's disastrous administration that this reward-the-wealthy approach wasn't the societal boon that it was advertised to be, but now we have scientific (...) (18 years ago, 16-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Trouble with IE, PNG and BS
|
|
Isn't this a problem with newsreaders not having the correct functionality? Surely following a thread wherever it goes should be a basic feature of a newsreader and its a bit lacking if it doesn't? Tim (18 years ago, 16-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Trouble with IE, PNG and BS
|
|
--snip-- (...) --snip-- Me too. Tim (18 years ago, 16-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Trouble with IE, PNG and BS
|
|
(...) That is great, except in some cases such as .announce.moc, which doesn't allow replies, so you are forced to set followups if you post there. (...) That is true, otherwise people trying to follow the thread on a newsreader will probably not (...) (18 years ago, 16-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Trouble with IE, PNG and BS
|
|
(...) I just realised something which is that if you are changing the followup-to you should mark it at the bottom of the message (as I have just done). That is something Didier should have done. (...) I'm not sure how he is meant to know where (...) (18 years ago, 16-Oct-06, to lugnet.general, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Two questions for the Conservatives and/or Republicans out there
|
|
(...) Of course, such indictments would ideally be brought by the justice department, hand-picked by Bush. Additionally, no Congressional investigations can occur (at least, not ones with subpoena power) without the blessing of the majority party. (...) (18 years ago, 13-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Two questions for the Conservatives and/or Republicans out there
|
|
(...) Well, what I meant to say was: if there is such conclusive evidence out there, then where are the indictments? I know that there is a lot of speculative evidence, but nothing that would hold up in a court of law. You, of all people, have (...) (18 years ago, 13-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Two questions for the Conservatives and/or Republicans out there
|
|
(...) John, are looking for evidence that the 2000 and 2004 elections were stolen (and for which abundant evidence exists)? Or are you looking for evidence of subsequent lies, distortions, and exaggerations by the Bush administration (for which (...) (18 years ago, 13-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Two questions for the Conservatives and/or Republicans out there
|
|
(...) No Botox needed. Listen, Tom, if anyone produces concrete evidence ie facts and not just partisan conspiracy theories, than I am "all in". Instead, it seems that it's too easy for the left to just speculate from the hip and shoot away in a (...) (18 years ago, 13-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Two questions for the Conservatives and/or Republicans out there
|
|
Are you actually able to say that with a straight face after the last 6 years? I can't imagine doing so without Botox involved. (...) (18 years ago, 13-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Two questions for the Conservatives and/or Republicans out there
|
|
(...) Are you implying that there isn't any oversight by any Democrat? (...) That could very well be; the concerns to me would be the ones outlined by DaveE. JOHN (18 years ago, 11-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Two questions for the Conservatives and/or Republicans out there
|
|
(...) Exactly. That's why it doesn't ring true for me. YMMV, JOHN (18 years ago, 11-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Two questions for the Conservatives and/or Republicans out there
|
|
(...) The current administration effectively owns the code now, and they're not going to let anyone see it. Open source is the only acceptable solution in this application. (18 years ago, 11-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Two questions for the Conservatives and/or Republicans out there
|
|
(...) Umm... Diebold's CEO stated in a letter that he was committed to delivering Ohio's electoral votes to the president. (URL) keeping them in office guarantees they keep their gig, So why should we trust them, when it's been demonstrated over and (...) (18 years ago, 11-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Two questions for the Conservatives and/or Republicans out there
|
|
(...) I don't trust Diebold, that's true, but I wouldn't trust any company in the same situation, even an avowed Liberal company. Diebold is on record promising to deliver Ohio's votes to the President in 2004, and lo and behold... In addition, I (...) (18 years ago, 9-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Two questions for the Conservatives and/or Republicans out there
|
|
(...) Yeah, there's gotta be a way. Or, maybe the code is owned by the government and Diebold merely provides the hardware? I'm no expert in this area, but it seems to me that electronic voting shouldn't be such a huge issue. JOHN (18 years ago, 9-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Two questions for the Conservatives and/or Republicans out there
|
|
(...) Well, I am not beholden to Diebold for anything. It seems to me that the bottom line is that you don't trust them, not the equipment they produce. Companies will always have some bias, either left or right; that is a given. What doesn't follow (...) (18 years ago, 9-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Two questions for the Conservatives and/or Republicans out there
|
|
(...) Of course you're not guaranteed, but you could do some 50/50 chance stuff. Imagine if one candidate is ahead in the polls with 75% of the vote (Sven), compared to another candidate with 25% (Twiggy). It could be argued that Twiggy has no (...) (18 years ago, 9-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Two questions for the Conservatives and/or Republicans out there
|
|
(...) That only assumes that the machine can't rig it during the individual vote. Once the votes are cast and the moderator goes to the machine, how do we verify that Candidate A really got 7,500 votes and Candidate B really got 2,500? (...) Oh, I (...) (18 years ago, 9-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Two questions for the Conservatives and/or Republicans out there
|
|
(...) Why not, Dave!? There can't be cheating if the machines could be rigged so that it doesn't know which candidates are under which button (if that is your concern). It would be like a double-blind study. Surely you aren't implying that the (...) (18 years ago, 9-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Two questions for the Conservatives and/or Republicans out there
|
|
Do you trust Diebold's touchscreen-based voting machines to record an accurate tally of votes? Why? Dave! (18 years ago, 9-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: The Pope gives Islam the bird?
|
|
(...) Yeah that was pretty stupid thing for the Pope to imply. It's not like the "west" hasn't pissed off the fundamentalist sects of all religions enough. So, lets pour some gas on the fire! It really is a bizarre world we live in lately : ( (18 years ago, 17-Sep-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | The Pope gives Islam the bird?
|
|
Check the story (URL) Discuss here in off-topic debate. It has been a while since a good hearted conversation has been going on in this sub forum, and, after my Saurian fighter (seemingly) received the snub in .Space, I am feeling slightly (...) (18 years ago, 16-Sep-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: 5 years ago - The day we all came together - 9/11/01
|
|
(...) Oh my goodness. Selçuk I am so sorry to hear about your experience. My heart goes out to you and your country man. I remember this event. I grew up in California, earthquakes were somewhat common, though it is nothing compared to what you went (...) (18 years ago, 13-Sep-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: BrickFest registration fees (was: LEGO Adult Fan Convention at Legoland California?)
|
|
(...) "Kids, they are going to call you America's most valuable natural resource. Have you seen what they do to valuable natural resources? The're going to strip mine your souls..." a nice quote from (Bruce) U. Utah Phillips Frankly, though...it (...) (18 years ago, 9-Sep-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Eric's and Jeff's chip was (Re: Ease up on marking folders Avatar)
|
|
(...) It's all about choice, apparently: (URL) ROSCO (18 years ago, 6-Sep-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Eric's and Jeff's chip was (Re: Ease up on marking folders Avatar)
|
|
(...) It's all a matter of choice apparently: (URL) ROSCO (18 years ago, 6-Sep-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Eric's and Jeff's chip was (Re: Ease up on marking folders Avatar)
|
|
(...) Sophie explained! Get your copy now! (URL) (18 years ago, 5-Sep-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Eric's and Jeff's chip was (Re: Ease up on marking folders Avatar)
|
|
(...) What's the matter? Truth hurt? (18 years ago, 5-Sep-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Abusive
|
|
I apologize for replying to my own post, but I figured I'd share some step by step instructions on how to filter out Mr. Sophie, if you're using Mozilla Thunderbird to read Lugnet like I am : Click on 'Tools' from the top text menu bar. Select (...) (18 years ago, 5-Sep-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Abusive
|
|
So how exactly do we filter out Mr.Sophie? Is there a check box or something for that in our preferences? If there isn't, there really should be : ( Baring that, we should all simply setup our newsreaders to filter him. Then put an banner on the (...) (18 years ago, 5-Sep-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Abusive
|
|
(...) Myself and many others have asked you on numerous occasions to shape up. Obviously we can't all get what we want. Jeff (18 years ago, 3-Sep-06, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Abusive
|
|
(...) Considering that everything I said is true my post is certainly not defamatory. And I certainly can't see anything obscene, vulgar, profane, or indecent in it either. It is arguably abusive (although equally arguably not due to the truth (...) (18 years ago, 3-Sep-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Eric's and Jeff's chip was (Re: Ease up on marking folders Avatar)
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Timothy Gould wrote: -snip- (...) Terms of Use: "(do not) Post or transmit any unlawful, threatening, abusive, libelous, defamatory, obscene, vulgar, pornographic, profane, or indecent information of any kind, including (...) (18 years ago, 3-Sep-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
