 | | Re: The Brick Testament - More Teachings of Jesus
|
|
(...) Yes, the medium is cumbersome, but at least it allows for a dialog with people with whom you might not normally engage. For me it is very time consuming, and many times I've left an interesting discussion because suddenly work pops up and I (...) (18 years ago, 13-Nov-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Two questions for the Conservatives and/or Republicans out there
|
|
(...) I guess it is only an issue when democrats lose. JOHN (18 years ago, 13-Nov-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: The Brick Testament - More Teachings of Jesus
|
|
Alright, where were we... let's see... (...) Ah, OK. It's silly how things can be taken the wrong way in a written debate that would be cleared up in an instant if we were speaking in person. But then again, I'm not much for debating in person. I (...) (18 years ago, 31-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: The Brick Testament - More Teachings of Jesus
|
|
--snip-- (...) --snip-- (...) Bad example ;) It is very easy to explain pi in numerous simple and rational ways. eg. pi=4(1 - 1/3 + 1/5 - 1/7 + 1/9 etc.) pi=( 16((1/5) - 1/3(1/5)^3 + 1/5(1/5)^5 - 1/7(1/5)^5 + ...) - 4((1/239) - 1/3(1/239)^3 + (...) (18 years ago, 26-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: The Brick Testament - More Teachings of Jesus
|
|
I never said the explanation would be "simple". I simply state that adding a Creator is making it *more complex* than it needs to be. (...) (18 years ago, 25-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The Brick Testament - More Teachings of Jesus
|
|
(...) I wish I could help you out, Dave! But I don't know jack about phones. And I'd have to brush up on painting staircases; I hear it's rail difficult. Well, if they ever arrest the regress, it would appear that their work would be able to be used (...) (18 years ago, 26-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: What are your axiomatic religious beliefs and why?
|
|
(...) In appreciation of your recent efforts here of late, the least I can do is answer your question :-) Taking a simple definition of religion, being belief in the existence of a god and its consequences for human behaviour, I discover that I do (...) (18 years ago, 26-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: What are your axiomatic religious beliefs and why?
|
|
(...) Hmm, this is a really good question, Brendan. It's hard to answer this truthfully, because I was raised in a Christian setting. So there are many things I believe that probably at their root go back to what I learned in Sunday School as a (...) (18 years ago, 25-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: The Brick Testament - More Teachings of Jesus
|
|
(...) I don't know that it's arrogant or naive, though it might be unjustifiably optimistic at the moment to call it "simple." Gould isn't saying that Hawking/Penrose will, like God, be magically able to terminate the regress; their intent is to (...) (18 years ago, 25-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: The Brick Testament - More Teachings of Jesus
|
|
(...) I like this part: First, most of the traditional arguments for God's existence, from Aquinas on, are easily demolished. Several of them, such as the First Cause argument, work by setting up an infinite regress which God is wheeled out to (...) (18 years ago, 25-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: The Brick Testament - More Teachings of Jesus
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, John Neal wrote: <snip> (...) <snip> (...) jumping in here again with this brief blurb-- (URL) are apt to quote the late Stephen Jay Gould's 'NOMA' - 'non-overlapping magisteria'. Gould claimed that science and true (...) (18 years ago, 25-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The Brick Testament - More Teachings of Jesus
|
|
(...) Here's how: The omniscient, omnipotent being always was, by definition. Irrational? You bet. (...) Are you suggesting that this stuff is in some way simple? (...) Though we've met a few times, you don't really know me that well because I'm (...) (18 years ago, 25-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: The Brick Testament - More Teachings of Jesus
|
|
(...) I hear that! I'm going to do some snipping to clean up a bit around the thread. (...) <snip> (...) Not at all. I'm just seeing common ground. (...) But you will probably always be irrational though you strive to be rational. You are a closet (...) (18 years ago, 25-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: The Brick Testament - More Teachings of Jesus
|
|
(...) Actually, it didn't really happen in a point in time, AFAIAC. Time began at that point. In fact, there's a good chance that "time" didn't "begin" (or stabilize) for "eons" (read in femto- or pico- seconds), just as our physics framework (as we (...) (18 years ago, 25-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The Brick Testament - More Teachings of Jesus
|
|
(...) Occam's Razor - the onus is on YOU to explain how an omniscient being just came into being, then created the universe. And if that being was created by another, who created *that* being (ad nauseum)?... Why must you insist on making things (...) (18 years ago, 25-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The Brick Testament - More Teachings of Jesus
|
|
(...) I'm not sure that it will be forever outside the scope of science. The more we learn, the more we discover. Take Brendan's sealed-closet example. And let's suppose we can walk around the closet. Well, we know whatever's in the closet has to (...) (18 years ago, 24-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: The Brick Testament - More Teachings of Jesus
|
|
(...) Now that's unfair:-) I am NOT arguing for creationism. Science is about explaining things. All I'm saying is that what happened pre Big Bang is inexplicable. (...) Agreed. (...) Thank you. That is entirely my point. Therefore any explanation (...) (18 years ago, 24-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: The Brick Testament - More Teachings of Jesus
|
|
(...) I have avoided using the word "proved" for that very good reason. (...) However in the absence of the alternate theory then the evidence supports the one theory. Which is why the Big Bang Theory is now commonly named as such whereas it used to (...) (18 years ago, 24-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: The Brick Testament - More Teachings of Jesus
|
|
(...) Well, I'm trying to be strictly accurate there. It's not that the evidence proves the conclusion, it's that the evidence doesn't contradict the conclusion. If we had (for example) two conflicting ideas about the origin of the universe (the Big (...) (18 years ago, 24-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: The Brick Testament - More Teachings of Jesus
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, David Eaton wrote: --snip-- (...) --snip-- (...) I believe that many predictions of the Big Bang theory have been verified which is why I say there is an overwhelming body of evidence for it. There is admittedly far more (...) (18 years ago, 24-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: The Brick Testament - More Teachings of Jesus
|
|
(...) Well, that's pretty unfair. That's like saying we NEED an answer, and if we can't come up with one, creationism is correct. If you go back to 500 BC and asked people why lightning happened, I'm sure they could come up with answers. But just (...) (18 years ago, 24-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Mini Hyperspace Transport Ring
|
|
(...) I hadn't but it makes an uncanny amount of sense. (...) Indeed it is. I try to keep one on the go at any given time. Sorry Eric but you've been superseded. (...) Not incompatible. I'm also increasing the meta-MOC reviews which is sort of like (...) (18 years ago, 24-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: The Brick Testament - More Teachings of Jesus
|
|
In the interest of brevity, nonredundancy, and my own sanity, I am going to skip responding to some of John's comments that have been taken up by Tim and DaveE. I also want to take a moment to note that I began this discussion by asking John to (...) (18 years ago, 24-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: The Brick Testament - More Teachings of Jesus
|
|
(...) Tim, (URL) this> touches on what I was talking about. JOHN (18 years ago, 24-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: The Brick Testament - More Teachings of Jesus
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Timothy Gould wrote: <snip> (...) That may be. I seem to remember reading something about the topic; perhaps I can do some digging around. (...) Yeah, I meant to address this elsewhere and forgot: I'm not talking about (...) (18 years ago, 24-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: The Brick Testament - More Teachings of Jesus
|
|
(...) But in that case, science will really never know. My belief in God can be viewed as a "best guess" scenario as well-- given the choice of believing that the universe spontaneously came into being, or a Creator causing it to happen (whose (...) (18 years ago, 24-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | What are your axiomatic religious beliefs and why?
|
|
This is an off-shoot from a (URL) discussion> John Neal and I were having on OT.debate, but I'd like to open up the following question to any religious believers who feel like answering. What would you say are your axiomatic religious beliefs? Let's (...) (18 years ago, 24-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: The Brick Testament - More Teachings of Jesus
|
|
(...) I'd rather not know than get my answers from a pulp paperback from 2000 years ago ;) (...) I think you'll find you're quite mistaken there. I know plenty of scientists who are Christian and I've never noticed their views to be taken better or (...) (18 years ago, 24-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: The Brick Testament - More Teachings of Jesus
|
|
(...) In the fullness of time (ie the end of our lives) we'll either all know or it won't matter anyway;-) This sounds like the time to mention Pascal's wager! (...) I think you missed my meaning. I meant scientists who are Christian, not "Christian (...) (18 years ago, 23-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Mech Bay 11
|
|
(...) Yes. Tim (18 years ago, 23-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The Brick Testament - More Teachings of Jesus
|
|
(...) Well, I think the issue is that the Bible gets treated differently than most other written works. I find that your (John's) particular take on Christianity is something closer to "inspired from the Bible" rather than "based on the Bible". The (...) (18 years ago, 23-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Mech Bay 11
|
|
(...) Is this really necessary? -- Tony Hafner www.hafhead.com (18 years ago, 23-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The Brick Testament - More Teachings of Jesus
|
|
Hi John, I've taken the liberty of only responding to those points which relate to what I believe to be your misunderstanding of science. Here is an (URL) article> on the scientific method for further reading. (...) This occurs in much the same way (...) (18 years ago, 23-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: The Brick Testament - More Teachings of Jesus
|
|
(...) Really? At what point during a rational evaluation process do you decide something? How can two scientists who evaluate the same evidence draw different conclusions? Do you know for sure from where "ideas" that "pop into your head" come? (...) (18 years ago, 23-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: The Brick Testament - More Teachings of Jesus
|
|
(...) If, by "ignorant," you mean "lacking knowledge," then the answer is yes. Science definitely accepts "we don't know," but it doesn't posit that as a final explanation, either. The correct framing is "we don't know/we think it's like this/here's (...) (18 years ago, 23-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: The Brick Testament - More Teachings of Jesus
|
|
(...) Agreed. But I for one appreciate it. And sometimes there is value in the struggle, even if it seems insurmountable unlikely to succeed. Someone needs to remind us all of this from time to time, and the Rev does it better than anyone I know. (...) (18 years ago, 23-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: The Brick Testament - More Teachings of Jesus
|
|
(...) I'm surprised you entered this one then. Religious debates are rarely worth participating in. Doubly so if bold John's involved. (18 years ago, 23-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: The Brick Testament - More Teachings of Jesus
|
|
Hi, Dave. (...) Heh, glad somebody is enjoying it. (...) You make a good point, Dave, and reading over what I wrote I can see why you've brought this up. In the Kirk case, Kirk has listed several independent arguments for why he should be be in (...) (18 years ago, 22-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: The Brick Testament - More Teachings of Jesus
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Brendan Powell Smith wrote: <snip> (...) <snip> (...) Great Googly Moogly this debate is great! Anyway, I just wanted to pop up at this one point--it's best described, for me anyway, as the 'Decker Arguement' See, here's (...) (18 years ago, 22-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The Brick Testament - More Teachings of Jesus
|
|
(...) No, they need not be mutually exclusive, but I don't see that that is more than a trivial point to make. I suppose someone could, for instance, be rationally convinced that nautral selection accounts for the diversity of life on Earth because (...) (18 years ago, 22-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: The Brick Testament - More Teachings of Jesus
|
|
--snip-- (...) I don't know where you got this idea from. There are plenty of ways to test hypotheses about the origins of the universe. The Big Bang hypothesis is pretty much accepted by all scientists to the point that it could almost be (...) (18 years ago, 22-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: The Brick Testament - More Teachings of Jesus
|
|
(...) Must they be mutually exclusive? (...) How? Via torture? ;-) (...) I'm not sure I even understand what the term "Son of God" means. I do know that it isn't merely a synonym of "Son of Man", "Lamb of God", "Messiah", etc. As for His revelation (...) (18 years ago, 22-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: The Brick Testament - More Teachings of Jesus
|
|
(...) Well, for me it's the ultimate question. And I believe that the origin of the universe is the ONLY PLACE where science and religion collide and become indistinguishable from each other. (...) Science doesn't just accept a "we don't know." (...) (18 years ago, 22-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: The Brick Testament - More Teachings of Jesus
|
|
(...) I'd venture to say that this is just about your favorite question, because you return to it repeatedly! The answers, of course, are many and various: atheists don't necessarily deny the existence of God; they just don't believe that he exists (...) (18 years ago, 20-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: The Brick Testament - More Teachings of Jesus
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Brendan Powell Smith wrote: <snip> (...) <snip> (...) And this is where I jump in (after reading most, but not all of this thread, so if this has been covered, please forgive) I think one of the first straws that sent me (...) (18 years ago, 19-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The Brick Testament - More Teachings of Jesus
|
|
--snip-- (...) It is also possible that the English word "division" in that context has changed. If you look at "divisional" it usually implies an active (and possibly hostile) act of division so it is not unreasonable to assume that the word it is (...) (18 years ago, 19-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: The Brick Testament - More Teachings of Jesus
|
|
(...) Just to clear up any misunderstandings, I don't read the actual original ancient Greek text of the New Testament, nor the ancient Hebrew of the Old Testament (though my girlfriend does read Hebrew and sometimes offers me her own translations). (...) (18 years ago, 19-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: The Brick Testament - More Teachings of Jesus
|
|
(...) Ahhh. That changes matters and explains your choice. I didn't realise you actually went back to the original text at times. Impressive. (...) I agree completely. I raised the point merely to anticipate arguments about your choice of (...) (18 years ago, 19-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: The Brick Testament - More Teachings of Jesus
|
|
(...) To say that it "rings true to you" almost makes it sound like you are evaluating it based on evidence and logic, rationally determining it to be the best explanatory theory. But this is quite different than saying that you are absolutely sure (...) (18 years ago, 19-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: The Brick Testament - More Teachings of Jesus
|
|
Hi, Tim. (...) As far as I understand it (though I am not fluent in ancient Greek myself) it is not merely the context that implies a violent division, but the Greek word itself. I realize that it is usually translated into English as simply (...) (18 years ago, 18-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: The Brick Testament - More Teachings of Jesus
|
|
(...) Well, let's say that it "rings true" to me; I find the wisdom valid for my life. Why? I don't know the reason. But it does. Why do you believe what you believe? Upon what rational basis do you (presumably) deny the existence of God? How do you (...) (18 years ago, 18-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: The Brick Testament - More Teachings of Jesus
|
|
(...) Sorry to respond... I forgot to mention something: I do think that the translation "Do you think I have come to bring peace on earth? No, I tell you, but hostility!" as used by the Reverand is probably not as accurate as "Do you think I have (...) (18 years ago, 18-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: The Brick Testament - More Teachings of Jesus
|
|
(...) Actually, it does really say that. Go read the entire passage and you will see that it says and means exactly that. I have seen an analysis which added a whole lot of created meaning to it in order to make it mesh with the common ideas of (...) (18 years ago, 18-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: The Brick Testament - More Teachings of Jesus
|
|
(...) Exactly. That's why I wouldn't trust it. I mean, even though Samarth hasn't read the Bible, he was sharp enough to ask "does the Bible really say or mean that?" It really doesn't. I know that it is BPS's intention to portray it in a mockingly (...) (18 years ago, 18-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: The Brick Testament - More Teachings of Jesus
|
|
(...) Well, yes and no. I agree that going to the source is the best way, but if Samarth was to do a Hindu equivalent of the Brick Testament I'm sure you would find a lot of stuff in it that you were coming to for the first time. Tim (18 years ago, 18-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: The Brick Testament - More Teachings of Jesus
|
|
Thanks for indulging me, John. (...) OK, I guess that answers most of the questions from my post. So, if I understand you correctly, when it comes right down to it, the reason you believe wholheartedly that Jesus spoke eternal religious truths about (...) (18 years ago, 18-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: The Brick Testament - More Teachings of Jesus
|
|
(...) Of course I believe the NT is as well. For example, Paul writes letters to specific communities with specific issues. Even the Gospels have specific audiences. Yeah, lots of the issues addressed are of the universal type, but some aren't. One (...) (18 years ago, 18-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: The Brick Testament - More Teachings of Jesus
|
|
Hi, John. (...) I've seen you draw this distinction in other posts here, and meant to ask you how exactly you derive this idea that the Old Testament is "contextual to the time" while the New Testament (presumably in your mind) is not merely so. (...) (18 years ago, 17-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Et tu, U2?
|
|
Paul Hewson, AKA Bono: Musician, Social Activist, (URL). And The Edge, (AKA David Evans) sums it up nicely: "Of course we're trying to be tax-efficient. Who doesn't want to be tax-efficient?" What's wrong with sexy? (Tap ref:-) JOHN (18 years ago, 17-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Wow! Re: Let that be a lesson to you
|
|
(...) Some people are simply beneath contempt (and in his case, 6 feet). Some people just need a good, old-fashioned fear of burning in hell to keep them honest in this life, eh? JOHN (18 years ago, 17-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Wow! Re: Let that be a lesson to you
|
|
(...) Doh! If (URL) doesn't qualify as beating the system, I don't know what does! Ken Lay, a stinker to the very end and beyond. Dave! (18 years ago, 17-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: The Brick Testament - More Teachings of Jesus
|
|
(...) Well, the only human immolating that went on that among the Israelites that I know of is the call for the sacrifice of Isaac (which was recanted anyway). Still, I would explain such interpretations of God's will as just that-- contextual to (...) (18 years ago, 17-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Supply-Side Economics? The Evidence Says No!
|
|
(...) Hey, I think I was just sucker-punched.... JOHN (18 years ago, 17-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Supply-Side Economics? The Evidence Says No!
|
|
(...) I find that offensive and insulting. I've worked long and hard to foul up my understanding of percentages, and I won't have you casting aspersions on my diligent efforts! Do you think dim-wittedeness like this comes easily? No way! Besides, (...) (18 years ago, 17-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: The Brick Testament - More Teachings of Jesus
|
|
(...) I'll need to find the passage again. It's been a while. But anyway, why is a loving and merciful God immolating anybody in the first place? Heck, by that metric, I'm more loving and merciful than God. (...) Sorry, but that's as much a (...) (18 years ago, 17-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Supply-Side Economics? The Evidence Says No!
|
|
(...) I've never heard it said that the US consumes 75% of the worlds resources. I've heard it consumes 25%. Are you learning percentages from Dave Schuler? (...) To be honest it kind of is. Your rates of literacy and numeracy are incredibly poor by (...) (18 years ago, 17-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Supply-Side Economics? The Evidence Says No!
|
|
(...) What about all of this rubbish about the US being 5% of the world's population (300,000,000 strong now, thankyouverymuch) and yet consuming 75%-ish of the world's resources? Balance that! (...) It's a wonder we are even able to dress ourselves (...) (18 years ago, 17-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: The Brick Testament - More Teachings of Jesus
|
|
(...) Do you mean "to have been kept"? The Old Testament contains a lot of historical information, including ancient worship practices, which have changed over time as cultures have changed/evolved. The important part to glean is that God never (...) (18 years ago, 17-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: The Brick Testament - More Teachings of Jesus
|
|
(...) Don't forget the rules on toes and scales for what you can eat. Tim (18 years ago, 17-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: The Brick Testament - More Teachings of Jesus
|
|
(...) That's good advice for believers, too. And if you don't read the Old Testament for yourself, how will you learn which incense to burn to keep from being immolated by the Lord's wrath? Dave! (18 years ago, 17-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Supply-Side Economics? The Evidence Says No!
|
|
(...) Not quite true any more. The EU is providing a balanced offset against the US nowadays (look at the strength of the Euro). From a world markets point of view the US is playing less of a role. And I wouldn't whinge about tariffs. Check how much (...) (18 years ago, 17-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: The Brick Testament - More Teachings of Jesus
|
|
(...) Eh, do yourself a favor and learn about the Bible from credible commentary, or the source itself. BPS must even cringe at that revelation. JOHN (18 years ago, 17-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Supply-Side Economics? The Evidence Says No!
|
|
(...) 2 out of 10 for spelling though;-) JOHN (18 years ago, 17-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Supply-Side Economics? The Evidence Says No!
|
|
(...) Well, let's be honest here. If your product is too expensive for the masses in the USA, it probably doesn't stand much of a chance in an even MORE empoverished world market overseas, especially with foreign governments' market-protection (...) (18 years ago, 17-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Supply-Side Economics? The Evidence Says No!
|
|
(...) OK, my maths is really wrong there :very embarassed: (2x0=0) Infinately better than perfect then. Tim (18 years ago, 17-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Supply-Side Economics? The Evidence Says No!
|
|
(...) Depends on what perfect is. Could be 2x perfect (if perfect=0) Tim (18 years ago, 17-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Supply-Side Economics? The Evidence Says No!
|
|
(...) That would be nice if it were true, but despite two administrations espousing that view, it has yet to work as promised. It fails for a number of reasons. First, you can't build a business if there isn't a demand to support it, and if the (...) (18 years ago, 17-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Supply-Side Economics? The Evidence Says No!
|
|
(...) "Half-wit" I'd say, but that would be too easy! >:-D (...) Well, my point is that it has been consistently used through the decades and therefore is a sort of standardized snapshot of our economy, if only one part. Though it doesn't reflect (...) (18 years ago, 17-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Supply-Side Economics? The Evidence Says No!
|
|
(...) Whoops! Not a failing of math, but of reading comprehension. I totally blew past your maximum of five and read a ten in its place. But half-perfect is nifty, too! (...) But it's accurate only inasmuch as an IQ test accurately measures IQ. (...) (18 years ago, 17-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: The Brick Testament - More Teachings of Jesus
|
|
(...) Thanks, Samarth. (...) It is out of context in the strict sense of the term. The same could be said of any of the illustrated passages from Jesus's Teachings, but the same must also be said of anyone else's quoting of Jesus's teachings, (...) (18 years ago, 17-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | 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)
|
