Subject:
|
Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This...
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Tue, 25 Mar 2003 03:45:42 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
984 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Dave Schuler writes:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Mike Petrucelli writes:
>
> > > > the same time period in which civil rights were non-existent,
> >
> > Which resolved regardless of the the attempts to stop it.
>
> Excuse me? In many cases it was forcibly resolved by the Federal
> Government.
>
> > > > Presidents could
> > > > serve an unlimited number of terms,
> >
> > So? That is why we have an election.
>
> As was demonstrated in 2000, the will of a majority of the people is not
> necessarily reflected in the election process.
Allow me to repeat this yet again. The percentage of votes that Gore supposedly
won the nation wide popular vote by was less than the percentage of votes bush
won in Florida by. Both numbers are well within the margin of error. However
the only single state that was so close was Florida. That is why they recounted
only that state and not all of them. The funny part is had the counted the way
"Team Bush" originally wanted he would have won by a smaller percentage, if the
counted the way "Team Gore" wanted Bush would have won by a larger percentage.
They found this a few months afterward when the media counted everything
themselves.
> > > > the securities industry was wholly (and
> > > > tragically) unregulated,
> >
> > So? Who's fault is it if they lose everything gambling on the securities
> > industry.
>
> You misunderstand--brokers routinely cheated their customers, and now
> Federal regulations existed to stop it. Let's say that the next time you go
> to the doctor, he surgically inserts a baboon's kidney into your body. Will
> you simply admit that you gambled and lost?
No, then I put a bullet through his head. See, holding people accountable for
their actions solves everything. I am sick of moral relativism, any mental
competent person know the differnce between right and wrong. Shooting someone
who intentionally and knowingly harmed you for their own gain is not wrong.
>
> > > > the military draft was in full effect,
> >
> > Like it would be again if neccessary.
>
> Perhaps, but it was supported by the Federal Government that you recall
> with nostalgia and was ended by the Federal Government that you decry.
I think you misunderstood me. I said it was better not perfect.
>
> > > > the environment was freely polluted by
> > > > unmonitored industry,
> >
> > So? Industry is self correcting. If no one buys a product because that • company
> > pollutes they wouldn't do it would they.
>
> That's optimistic, but it's also foolish naivete. Experience shows that
> corporations will work to get away with exactly as much as actionable
> legislation will allow them to get away with. If you're positing some kind
> of self-policing free market model, you'll need to docuement the precise
> implementation of it, and you'll need to show that it would be superior to
> what's now in place. Otherwise, you're simply wishing.
If people don't buy from a company they go out of buisness.
>
> > > > the interstate freeway system didn't exist,
> >
> > Yeah Ford, Chevy, and Lincoln did some good lobbying for that. Nevermind they
> > also paid to rip out most of the rail lines.
>
> That's an ad hominem attack. Anyway, you're asserting the only
> beneficiaries of the interstate system are car companies. Is this your view?
Let's see 50 years ago (If I was alive then) I could have taken a train or bus
to all of the major towns and cites around me. Today I have two choices drive
or don't go.
>
> > > > poll taxes were in effect,
> >
> > Its a wonder no politicians were shot over that.
>
> Right, but they're the politicians of the era that you recall so fondly.
>
> > > > alcohol was illegal,
> >
> > Yeah that worked about as good as the war on drugs.
>
> Right, but it was made illegal by the politicians of the era that you
> recall so fondly.
Again better does not mean perfect.
>
> > > > rural electrical service didn't exist,
> >
> > So? Our reliance on a centralized power grid is a weakness not a strength.
>
> It's hardly centralized, unless by "centralized" you mean that there are
> hundreds of generation points and thousands of distribution centers. What's
> your alternative?
Every house should be shingled with solar panels and have backup generators.
There should not be a power grid.
>
> > > > and the FDIC hadn't yet come into being?
> >
> > And it has been screwing with the economy ever since.
>
> Because I'm a nice guy, I'll let you research and retract that statement
> before I destroy it for you.
See that falls under accountablitly and the idiotic notion that if its legal
its OK even if one knows its wrong.
>
> > See this is my viewpoint. People are responsible for their own actions, and
> > should be held accountable for them.
>
> Well, that's nice as a pipe dream, but it has never had the chance to work
> in reality (not on Earth, anyway, and pre-industrial-revolution-era villages
> don't count as models). But what on Earth makes you think that corporations
> would be any more readily accountable than the Government that you so revile?
So long as people are willing to tolerate incorrect behaviour, then it will not
work.
|
|
Message has 3 Replies:
Message is in Reply To:
164 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
