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 / *3826 (-20)
  Re: Libertarian stuff
 
(...) Yes. Really. "Going by past successes", that is called. (...) So what you are really saying is that you'd rather not do it because you're afraid it might not work. Well, your choice. (...) Thought you were talking about donors. Okay, (...) (25 years ago, 19-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]
 
(...) Which is why you need said government fairly strong to be able to make sure those corporations _don't_ start doing things like that. Jasper (25 years ago, 19-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: stuff (was: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?])
 
(...) VAT in practice, though, is more of a sales tax except that companies don't pay it. What happens is that everybody charges VAT on everything, which is to be transferred through to the government, but companies get any VAT they have paid back. (...) (25 years ago, 19-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: stuff (was: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?])
 
Christopher Weeks wrote in message <3884B49F.7877B548@e...se.net>... (...) You (...) designated (...) Democratic). (...) Hmm. Most people who I disagree with in real life would not score as Libertarians on that test. In fact I have talked a few into (...) (25 years ago, 19-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Swearing?
 
Mark Rendle wrote in message ... (...) This is basically what I said in my post concerning art and artwork. Perhaps there is a more suitable word for my definition of the word art - anything a man creates. If so, then that eliminates the need for (...) (25 years ago, 19-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Libertarian stuff
 
Jasper Janssen wrote in message <38970e5b.389705315@...et.com>... (...) Oh, really?! (...) a (...) I'd like to see that happen. I am sure the Liberals (Socialists) of this country would love it, too... "Wow, those Libertarians in that state are (...) (25 years ago, 19-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]
 
(...) <snipped example - I could counter it, but that would lead to wheel-spinning> (...) Hmm. That's not quite what I was getting at - I'm in favor of personal responsibility and liability, in a general sense. However, in a large organization, I (...) (25 years ago, 19-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]
 
(...) Ack! I don't like that. I'm a strong supporter of the idea of personal liability, but that ranks as an accident, if I understand you. We believe (don't we?) that the herb, rosemary is safe, so we dispose of it willy nilly. Twenty years from (...) (25 years ago, 19-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]
 
<3884AEDA.9C6DA48F@eclipse.net> <FoJnnJ.2xu@lugnet.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit (...) -- How do you hold a company's officers liable? If company X spills toxic goo -- into a river, who is (...) (25 years ago, 19-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]
 
<3884AEDA.9C6DA48F@eclipse.net> <FoJMsz.K0p@lugnet.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit (...) I think that if the answer is no, then it will still help, but not as much. Or maybe cause a industry ceo cycle (...) (25 years ago, 19-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: New policy for LS@h
 
(...) I was referring to the "people would not notice nearly as much". (...) No. I don't. Why is there a difference? You've still never explained that, all you say is "that should be selfevident". Why do you not trust government? It is made up of (...) (25 years ago, 18-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: IP (was: Re: Any suggestions on a homepage?)
 
(...) Ah, right. I read your post as saying that it was OK to cut and paste HTML code[1], though not content itself. (...) A.C. Doyle? Quite probably something is wrong. It's just that I can't manage to see it either, which is why I asked you. (...) (...) (25 years ago, 18-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Some auction pages just hurt your eyes.
 
(...) I think what I'd most like to see are ebay "preferred forms" to still allow users to select which they'd like the most (also show the popularity of each form), and alternatively (if you REALLY want your own format) you can do it, but a little (...) (25 years ago, 18-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.market.auction)
 
  Re: Some auction pages just hurt your eyes.
 
(...) Yes! Or maybe ridiculous price, stay away!, etc. ;) Scott S. (25 years ago, 18-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.market.auction)
 
  Re: Libertarian stuff (Was: Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?])
 
(...) Yes. The problem is complex, though: If you go back to a small community (say, max cities out at 100k inhabitants.), can you still sustain technology at out current level, and rise beyond that? Are million-plus-inhabitant cities a necessary (...) (25 years ago, 18-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Some auction pages just hurt your eyes.
 
He said... (...) limited to (...) single (...) I said... (...) listings (...) Buyers can (...) Someone else said... (...) True. (...) Also, true. Maybe they could put a little *annoying* gif next to the listing like *hot*, *gallery*, etc. -Rob. (25 years ago, 18-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.market.auction)
 
  Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]
 
Richard Franks wrote in message ... (...) think (...) For things done while they were in power, sure. Although I'm not sure how statute of limitations should play in, though the only things which should have a statute of limitations are things for (...) (25 years ago, 18-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]
 
(...) Yup, one would - and that is the current set-up. But I believe(1) that I was responding to an impression that governments are evil because they'll do this, but corporations aren't, because they won't. James (URL) hunting through the thread for (...) (25 years ago, 18-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: True Right Wing Fascists
 
(...) :O We agree on a lot more than just that.. but the differences define us, so to speak. Richard (25 years ago, 18-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: True Right Wing Fascists
 
(...) We've all got to stop *agreeing* like this or people will talk. (25 years ago, 18-Jan-00, 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