 | | Re: Keeping Larry Amused
|
|
I decided to go back and see what the actual story here was, that is, what it was I actually said that started this thread. Every one has been making assumptions about it, even me. In a post which I otherwise heavily trimmed, Bruce said the (...) (25 years ago, 31-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: stuff (was: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?])
|
|
Bruce Schlickbernd wrote in message ... (...) even (...) Yep, and we collectively agreed that the more successful people would do the major part in paying these taxes. Against their will (and rights) of course. (...) can't (...) People who are on (...) (25 years ago, 31-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: An Alternative..
|
|
Sorry Richard, this has been sitting in my draft folder... Richard Franks wrote in message ... (...) <snip> (...) country (...) agree, (...) almost (...) That depends on geography. The Federal government doesn't exert that much control here. (...) (...) (25 years ago, 31-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Keeping Larry Amused
|
|
(...) Note carefully that there is no claim that the following is *practical* or a good idea. Merely that it is doable. In fact it is hugely impractical and a terrible idea. Lightning is a good thing, actually, despite the fact that sometimes it (...) (25 years ago, 30-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: We are not amused (was Re: Keeping Larry Amused
|
|
(...) Yes, you're right. I should have been more careful in snipping attributions, when doing so might have left the wrong impression. I've apologised for that. I'll do it again. I hereby apologise for snipping attributions. Although I certainly (...) (25 years ago, 30-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]
|
|
(...) Try "either the CEO is personally liable for everything his subordinates do, or those people actually committing the mistakes are". (...) What if "some damages" comes out to more than they can pay? In the majhority of cases, this is in fact (...) (25 years ago, 30-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]
|
|
(...) You can sell all its assets, quite effectively reducing it to rubble. (...) If the CEO takes all the corporate assets when there is a fine outstanding against those assets, something criminal is happening that has _nothing_ to do with general (...) (25 years ago, 30-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]
|
|
(...) It's not a better system, so that's entirely irrelevant. (...) I was in fact suggesting that the situation does not currently exist to the extent that it would. (...) Yah. Right. Big companies will always spend a dollar to save a cent (and not (...) (25 years ago, 30-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Keeping Larry Amused
|
|
(...) Because you're both right. The one does not exclude the other. (you a bit less than bruce, to be fair, but still..) Jasper (25 years ago, 30-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: We are not amused (was Re: Keeping Larry Amused
|
|
(...) Larry, attributions are never, _NEVER_ "some stuff". Snipping attributions is not a good debating tactic, it's not clever, and in fact, it makes you look like an ass, which I know you aren't. If some notices you snipped attributions, the (...) (25 years ago, 30-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Keeping Larry Amused
|
|
(...) I don't know exactly what you're smoking, but I think I'd like you to keep it away from me. How, pray tell, could we prevent lightning from ever striking? Note, _ever_ means _one_hundred_percent_ effective. Jasper (25 years ago, 30-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: stuff (was: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?])
|
|
(...) For one, the electorate has to agree to go to libertopia in the first place. (...) Personal liability now includes not only things you might possibly be indirectly responsible for, which already is very insidious, but also things you are not (...) (25 years ago, 30-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Cheap American shot (Was: NEW Mindstorms set shown (with picture!))
|
|
I would like to applaud Kyle for writing a very mature post without any naming calling. I was beginning to think that it wasn't possible. What I feel some of us are failing to realize is that every country is essentially the same. There are some (...) (25 years ago, 30-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Cheap American shot (Was: NEW Mindstorms set shown (with picture!))
|
|
I agree with most of what Kyle said in this calm, well written post as well as the other one he posted in response to Clint. However, there are two fundamental points I do wish to take issue with and they are as follows: - Cultural relativism is not (...) (25 years ago, 30-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Cheap American shot (Was: NEW Mindstorms set shown (with picture!))
|
|
I'd like to make one more point, especially to Mr. Rutkas Some of the previous posts originate from patriottic sentiments. Nothing badly wrong with that, but some would call these sentiments nationalistic. Nationalism is one of the things that (...) (25 years ago, 30-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Cheap American shot (Was: NEW Mindstorms set shown (with picture!))
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Kyle D. Jackson writes: <much well-written reason and logic snipped> <it's polite too> <;)> Hear Hear! K.M. (25 years ago, 30-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Cheap American shot (Was: NEW Mindstorms set shown (with picture!))
|
|
(...) [snip] (...) [snip] Clint, I've already posted a huge message in this regard, which I hope everyone reads, and will maybe learn something from..., not that I presume to be worthy of teaching anybody anything. But I decided to reply to your (...) (25 years ago, 30-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Cheap American shot (Was: NEW Mindstorms set shown (with picture!))
|
|
I really did not want to jump into a sensitive issue, but I think I have some insight to offer that may be enlightening to people both in and outside of the USA. I am not making any statements one way or the other, and I reserve my own opinions to (...) (25 years ago, 30-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Cheap American shot (Was: NEW Mindstorms set shown (with picture!))
|
|
Snip (...) I (...) they (...) This is also a class issue, where lower incomes get pushed to "lower end" jobs while higher classes get to have their sons and daughters assume management roles no matter how stupid they are. (Which I which we certainly (...) (25 years ago, 30-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Blair Witch Project - Thoughts?
|
|
Adam Yulish wrote in message <3893398D.617B42FA@ee.net>... (...) Sounds a lot like what I call life affirming versus non-life affirming, to an extent, so I can see where you are coming from, I think. (...) I am getting the impression that you say (...) (25 years ago, 30-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
