Arm flab exercise?

Quoted message said:

Roger Zoul said:

[email hidden] wrote:
:> Bob (this one) wrote:
:>
:> <snip>
:>
:> > When it doesn't, it's typing practice.
:> >
:> > Pastorio
:>
:> More like mental masturbation.

That's good for you, you know....

Perhaps. Some say masturbation is a springboard and practicing ground
for real sexual experience.

Yeah. Guys who don't have experience with the real thing. <G>

Quoted message said:

Mental masturbation might someday lead to real thinking.

You gotta hope so, doc. No, no, you keep that hankie...

Pastorio

Bob (this one) said:

[email hidden] wrote:

<snip>

Quoted message said:

And you talk about charities and their good works
as examples of how things should be but seem unable to say how the
12,000 Kodak employees who have been displaced should be dealt with,
both for them and their families, and the society and its economy.

<snip>

Quoted message said:

Pastorio

I live in Kodak country. Rochester, in fact. You seem to gas on and
on about the value of "massive government projects" and the like, and
forget we have plenty of massive government programs going on right
now. A 300 billion dollar (and counting) one in Iraq right now, in
fact. Seems to be helping no one here.

Yes, I'm sure you want some better government that would pour the
money into some big ditch-digging project that would be to your liking.
Unfortunately, most voters are idiots, and that doesn't seem likely to
change anytime soon. So, your pie-in-the-sky notions about government
don't help us worth [censored].

While you gnash your teeth impotently and wax eloquently about the
mythical Great Society days of yore, folks like Catholic Family
Charities, Goodwill, The Salvation Army and others are retraining the
Kodak workers and feeding their families, and doing the best they can.

Suze said:

Quoting Bob (this one):

Quoted message said:

Marsha said:

Suze wrote:

[...]

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>>What a pretentious thing though. "I'm in a club for smart people."

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>Exactly. It also comes across as incredibly insecure.
>"I'm smrt, I'm smrt! Really, I am..."

Quoted message said:

I agree that it's bad form to put that into posts here, but I'd disagree
that it says smart. I say it implies accomplishment, more than IQ.

I agree. There was some context altering snippage along the way.

That part of my post was in reference to Max mentioning his Mensa
membership, not the MBA.

I asked him why he would mention either the MBA or Mensa, then Om
replied saying that JC had questioned Max's intelligence, and that
Mensa members are generally intelligent so that's probably why he
brought it up.

Then dr ernie came in with the "what a pretentious thing..." comment.

Sorry if any of my comments were misdirected with you.

Dr Ernie needs to look to himself before commenting about others.

Pastorio

Quoted message said:

Bob (this one) said:

[email hidden] wrote:

<snip>

Quoted message said:

And you talk about charities and their good works
as examples of how things should be but seem unable to say how the
12,000 Kodak employees who have been displaced should be dealt with,
both for them and their families, and the society and its economy.

<snip>

Quoted message said:

Pastorio

I live in Kodak country. Rochester, in fact. You seem to gas on and
on about the value of "massive government projects" and the like, and
forget we have plenty of massive government programs going on right
now. A 300 billion dollar (and counting) one in Iraq right now, in
fact. Seems to be helping no one here.

Right. Perhaps my opposition to it conveniently slipped past you. Must
be that reading problem.

Quoted message said:

Yes, I'm sure you want some better government that would pour the
money into some big ditch-digging project that would be to your liking.

If there's a "big ditch-digging project" needed, who should do it? Oh, I
forgot. You have no ideas about how to actually get things like that
done. Tunnels. National parks. The space program. The Smithsonian. All
gone with your "philosophy."

Quoted message said:

Unfortunately, most voters are idiots,

Really? Idiots? Idiots, you say. I truly admire your "man of the people"
viewpoint. Your faith in the electorate. Your capacity to see the good
in folks.

I suggest you find a good psychologist and try to deal with your extreme
negativity. It's obviously affecting your political philosophy, your
ability to post coherent thoughts to newsgroups (obvious most are
voters, so most must be idiots)...

Could you be more obtuse and could you more perfectly exemplify the
effete snobbery of the overeducated and underhumanized? It is a singular
astonishment what a profound lack of affect you have - how distant you
are from human experience and human goodness. Amazing.

Quoted message said:

and that doesn't seem likely to
change anytime soon. So, your pie-in-the-sky notions about government
don't help us worth [censored].

And yet, I notice no ideas from you about how to deal with all the
issues I raised that you snipped out. And have snipped out all through
this thread. You condemn my viewpoint, which I've spelled out and
offered examples for, without offering anything better, or anything at
all, really except "let those charities do everything."

Quoted message said:

While you gnash your teeth impotently

Shame you haven't actually read the posts about this whole subject. Or
if you have, you'd see how inappropriate your choice of characterization
and description is. I offer these two statements om the premise that
incompetence is better than dishonesty.

Quoted message said:

and wax eloquently about the
mythical Great Society days of yore,

Wonderful misrepresentation of what I've said. Kudos to your willingness
to lay it out so distortedly. I've not praised or waxed eloquently about
the Great Society and I won't. It was a misguided and misdirected failure.

The very simple fact of the matter is that I've offered ways to get
things done that have worked in the past and present. You've offered
nothing but condemnation of what I've said. So, doc, again. Who cleans
up toxic waste dumps? Who dredges the Mississippi? Who builds bridges?
Who delivers the mail? How do those things get paid for? Who runs the
projects?

Quoted message said:

folks like Catholic Family
Charities, Goodwill, The Salvation Army and others are retraining the
Kodak workers and feeding their families, and doing the best they can.

The best they can? Is it enough? Would the workers and their families be
enthused about how well it's all going? How do they feel about getting
your generous "charity?" How would you feel about getting "charity?"
Would you be a "charity case?" Perhaps you would slip into the "less
fortunate" category.

Funny thing, I didn't see your name in the list of who's doing stuff.
Those charities rely on contributions and in recent years, such
contributions have declined precipitously. You have offered a vacuum of
ideas in the face of real needs. And you condemn large groups of people
as inhuman categories. I bet you're a good psychologist.

No, seriously...

Pastorio

Bob (this one) <[email hidden]> wrote:
:> Roger Zoul wrote:
:>
:> > Bob (this one) <[email hidden]> wrote:
:>
:> > :> Roger Zoul wrote:
:>
:> > :> > I see it as entertainment.
:> > :>
:> > :> And a good bit of it is exactly that, by intent and by
:> > :> language. I assume that people can understand it when I write
:> > :> full-out. Agreement not important. Conversion not important.
:> > :> Acceptance not important. It's all about the dialogue and the
:> > :> trading of views. It's all about triggering thoughts other then
:> > :> the usual. When it works, it's great. When it doesn't, it's
:> > :> typing practice.
:> >
:> > Please don't stop....I can read your stuff while doing other
:> > things 🙂
:>
:> <LOL> Not too demanding, huh...?
:>

I wouldn't say that! I appreciate your hard work! 🙂

:> Did I ever tell you the one where it rhymes with Nantucket...?
:>
:> Pastorio

Bob (this one) <[email hidden]> wrote:
:> [email hidden] wrote:
:> > Bob (this one) wrote:
:> >
:> >>[email hidden] wrote:
:> >
:> > <snip>
:> >
:> >>And you talk about charities and their good works
:> >>as examples of how things should be but seem unable to say how the
:> >>12,000 Kodak employees who have been displaced should be dealt
:> >>with, both for them and their families, and the society and its
:> >>economy.
:> >
:> > <snip>
:> >
:> >>Pastorio
:> >
:> > I live in Kodak country. Rochester, in fact. You seem to gas on
:> > and on about the value of "massive government projects" and the
:> > like, and forget we have plenty of massive government programs
:> > going on right now. A 300 billion dollar (and counting) one in
:> > Iraq right now, in fact. Seems to be helping no one here.
:>
:> Right. Perhaps my opposition to it conveniently slipped past you.
:> Must
:> be that reading problem.
:>
:> > Yes, I'm sure you want some better government that would pour the
:> > money into some big ditch-digging project that would be to your
:> > liking.
:>
:> If there's a "big ditch-digging project" needed, who should do it?
:> Oh, I forgot. You have no ideas about how to actually get things
:> like that done. Tunnels. National parks. The space program. The
:> Smithsonian. All gone with your "philosophy."
:>
:> > Unfortunately, most voters are idiots,
:>
:> Really? Idiots? Idiots, you say. I truly admire your "man of the
:> people" viewpoint. Your faith in the electorate. Your capacity to
:> see the good
:> in folks.
:>
:> I suggest you find a good psychologist and try to deal with your
:> extreme negativity. It's obviously affecting your political
:> philosophy, your ability to post coherent thoughts to newsgroups
:> (obvious most are
:> voters, so most must be idiots)...
:>
:> Could you be more obtuse and could you more perfectly exemplify the
:> effete snobbery of the overeducated and underhumanized? It is a
:> singular astonishment what a profound lack of affect you have - how
:> distant you are from human experience and human goodness. Amazing.
:>
:> > and that doesn't seem likely to
:> > change anytime soon. So, your pie-in-the-sky notions about
:> > government don't help us worth [censored].
:>
:> And yet, I notice no ideas from you about how to deal with all the
:> issues I raised that you snipped out. And have snipped out all
:> through this thread. You condemn my viewpoint, which I've spelled
:> out and
:> offered examples for, without offering anything better, or anything
:> at all, really except "let those charities do everything."
:>
:> > While you gnash your teeth impotently
:>
:> Shame you haven't actually read the posts about this whole subject.
:> Or
:> if you have, you'd see how inappropriate your choice of
:> characterization and description is. I offer these two statements om
:> the premise that incompetence is better than dishonesty.
:>
:> > and wax eloquently about the
:> > mythical Great Society days of yore,
:>
:> Wonderful misrepresentation of what I've said. Kudos to your
:> willingness to lay it out so distortedly. I've not praised or waxed
:> eloquently about the Great Society and I won't. It was a misguided
:> and misdirected failure.
:>
:> The very simple fact of the matter is that I've offered ways to get
:> things done that have worked in the past and present. You've offered
:> nothing but condemnation of what I've said. So, doc, again. Who
:> cleans
:> up toxic waste dumps? Who dredges the Mississippi? Who builds
:> bridges? Who delivers the mail? How do those things get paid for?
:> Who runs the projects?
:>
:> > folks like Catholic Family
:> > Charities, Goodwill, The Salvation Army and others are retraining
:> > the Kodak workers and feeding their families, and doing the best
:> > they can.
:>
:> The best they can? Is it enough? Would the workers and their
:> families be enthused about how well it's all going? How do they feel
:> about getting your generous "charity?" How would you feel about
:> getting "charity?" Would you be a "charity case?" Perhaps you would
:> slip into the "less fortunate" category.
:>
:> Funny thing, I didn't see your name in the list of who's doing stuff.
:> Those charities rely on contributions and in recent years, such
:> contributions have declined precipitously. You have offered a vacuum
:> of ideas in the face of real needs. And you condemn large groups of
:> people as inhuman categories. I bet you're a good psychologist.

Are you saying that we have the crazy helping the crazy, Bob?

Roger Zoul said:

Bob (this one) <[email hidden]> wrote:
:> [email hidden] wrote:
:> > Bob (this one) wrote:
:> >
:> >>[email hidden] wrote:
:> >
:> > <snip>
:> >
:> >>And you talk about charities and their good works
:> >>as examples of how things should be but seem unable to say how the
:> >>12,000 Kodak employees who have been displaced should be dealt
:> >>with, both for them and their families, and the society and its
:> >>economy.
:> >
:> > <snip>
:> >
:> >>Pastorio
:> >
:> > I live in Kodak country. Rochester, in fact. You seem to gas on
:> > and on about the value of "massive government projects" and the
:> > like, and forget we have plenty of massive government programs
:> > going on right now. A 300 billion dollar (and counting) one in
:> > Iraq right now, in fact. Seems to be helping no one here.
:>
:> Right. Perhaps my opposition to it conveniently slipped past you.
:> Must
:> be that reading problem.
:>
:> > Yes, I'm sure you want some better government that would pour the
:> > money into some big ditch-digging project that would be to your
:> > liking.
:>
:> If there's a "big ditch-digging project" needed, who should do it?
:> Oh, I forgot. You have no ideas about how to actually get things
:> like that done. Tunnels. National parks. The space program. The
:> Smithsonian. All gone with your "philosophy."
:>
:> > Unfortunately, most voters are idiots,
:>
:> Really? Idiots? Idiots, you say. I truly admire your "man of the
:> people" viewpoint. Your faith in the electorate. Your capacity to
:> see the good
:> in folks.
:>
:> I suggest you find a good psychologist and try to deal with your
:> extreme negativity. It's obviously affecting your political
:> philosophy, your ability to post coherent thoughts to newsgroups
:> (obvious most are
:> voters, so most must be idiots)...
:>
:> Could you be more obtuse and could you more perfectly exemplify the
:> effete snobbery of the overeducated and underhumanized? It is a
:> singular astonishment what a profound lack of affect you have - how
:> distant you are from human experience and human goodness. Amazing.
:>
:> > and that doesn't seem likely to
:> > change anytime soon. So, your pie-in-the-sky notions about
:> > government don't help us worth [censored].
:>
:> And yet, I notice no ideas from you about how to deal with all the
:> issues I raised that you snipped out. And have snipped out all
:> through this thread. You condemn my viewpoint, which I've spelled
:> out and
:> offered examples for, without offering anything better, or anything
:> at all, really except "let those charities do everything."
:>
:> > While you gnash your teeth impotently
:>
:> Shame you haven't actually read the posts about this whole subject.
:> Or
:> if you have, you'd see how inappropriate your choice of
:> characterization and description is. I offer these two statements om
:> the premise that incompetence is better than dishonesty.
:>
:> > and wax eloquently about the
:> > mythical Great Society days of yore,
:>
:> Wonderful misrepresentation of what I've said. Kudos to your
:> willingness to lay it out so distortedly. I've not praised or waxed
:> eloquently about the Great Society and I won't. It was a misguided
:> and misdirected failure.
:>
:> The very simple fact of the matter is that I've offered ways to get
:> things done that have worked in the past and present. You've offered
:> nothing but condemnation of what I've said. So, doc, again. Who
:> cleans
:> up toxic waste dumps? Who dredges the Mississippi? Who builds
:> bridges? Who delivers the mail? How do those things get paid for?
:> Who runs the projects?
:>
:> > folks like Catholic Family
:> > Charities, Goodwill, The Salvation Army and others are retraining
:> > the Kodak workers and feeding their families, and doing the best
:> > they can.
:>
:> The best they can? Is it enough? Would the workers and their
:> families be enthused about how well it's all going? How do they feel
:> about getting your generous "charity?" How would you feel about
:> getting "charity?" Would you be a "charity case?" Perhaps you would
:> slip into the "less fortunate" category.
:>
:> Funny thing, I didn't see your name in the list of who's doing stuff.
:> Those charities rely on contributions and in recent years, such
:> contributions have declined precipitously. You have offered a vacuum
:> of ideas in the face of real needs. And you condemn large groups of
:> people as inhuman categories. I bet you're a good psychologist.

Are you saying that we have the crazy helping the crazy, Bob?

<LOL> A psyche teacher I became friendly with said that the vast
majority of people who go into the field do so to learn to deal with
their own problems.

Following that logic, people who go to culinary school are probably just
hungry. What could that possibly say about proctologists?

Pastorio

"Bob (this one)" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Luna wrote:

<snip>

Quoted message said:

I never even noticed. I guess I was paying more attention to the
content than the style.

Perhaps I do have low self-esteem, but here goes anyways: I find
Bob's posts irritating for exactly the above reason. His posts (.50
cent words and all) are like a big beautiful car with no engine in it.

What grand imagery. What wonderfully empty concision. This from the guy
who wants government to stop building roads, cleaning up toxic waste,
retraining displaced workers, building bridges. We should somehow get it
all done from "self-interest." Maybe Marjorie down the block can ramrod
the 8-lane bridge across the Mississippi after soccer practice.

Speaking of no engines...

Pastorio

I would love the government to do away with some of their pork projects that
they waste so much money on - projects that senators and other politicians
throw in big bills - so large that these expenditures are usually
overlooked. I would also love our governments - both state and federal to
reduce the amount of money spent on "free" programs. I am talking about the
welfare program and to some extent unemployment. So many people get these
free benefits that don't really need them. There are others who get them
and refuse to get off their butts and try to make their lives better.
Instead of giving all these benefits away - why not require the recipients
to do something to earn them - volunteer work or community service. But
government is government and people would start whining if they took all
their benefits. Don't get me wrong - there are instances when the help is
needed - ie a stay at home Mom's (or Dad) spouse dies and they need
assistance while the surviving spouse trains for a job or finds a job, or a
person loses their job and they need assistance temporarily until they find
another job. There are too many people who use the handouts as a permanent
way of life and that is what I oppose.
Diane

"Bob (this one)" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

JC Der Koenig said:

"Bob (this one)" <[email hidden]> wrote

Quoted message said:

If you're going to be critical, do try to be honest. I know; a burden. I
don't "expound on" my education. That sounds like I boast about it. Nope.

I demonstrate it.

Before you go gettin' the big head, let me point out that you're a bit
wordy.

I know that. My wife the writer reminds me of that with some frequency. A
failing of mine, I guess. But I'm not concerned enough about it to do much
changing. I apologize to all who fall asleep from the length and density
of my posts. I know I do, myself, sometimes... <LOL>

I get lost in the fullness of expressing the notions. But as long as none
of our posts are mandatory and not part of the final grade of life, it can
be whatever it becomes.

Your posts are the essence of annoying brevity. But I read them because
you usually hit the mark. Now and again, I splurt my cup of tea on the
monitor. And, still, I'm being talked at and talked about and flamed, I
*still* can't get my name in the freakin headers. You still have more
threads about you.

Curses, foiled again...

Pastorio (see how long a short answer can become?)

You're still not as bad as Dickens or Freud.

Keep trying.

In article <[email hidden]>,

Bob (this one) said:

Quoted message said:

Luna said:

In article <[email hidden]>,
[email hidden] wrote:

>Luna wrote:
>
><snip>
>
>>I never even noticed. I guess I was paying more attention to the
>>content than the style.
>>
>>--
>>http://www.mindspring.com/~lunachick
>
> Perhaps I do have low self-esteem, but here goes anyways: I find
>Bob's posts irritating for exactly the above reason. His posts (.50
>cent words and all) are like a big beautiful car with no engine in it.

Huh. While I agree with approximately .05% of his positions, I can
follow his logic quite easily. We just operate from different
postulates.

I don't necessarily disagree with you. However, he still seems to use
quite a lot of words to elucidate a what in the end is a pretty
simplistic position (e.g., neoliberal political philosophy).

As opposed to a political philosophy that has no practical components
for delivering the mail, constructing highways, making national parks,
patrolling borders, controlling waterways...

I hope you're not talking about me. We both think the government should
collect taxes to pay for necessities, we just don't agree on what is a
necessity and what isn't. I would agree that all of the above are
necessities. Those things benefit everyone. I'm also in favor of taxes
for public schools, I just don't like the way they are run right now and
I don't think more money is the answer. But it's better to have them as
they are now than not to have them. I'm also in favor of job training
programs, if they're effective, because it's a way to turn a
non-productive person into a productive person, if they're willing to do
the work.

What I'm not in favor of is money for nothing given to people who aren't
willing to do the work. The whiners who expect the government to fix the
problems they've created for themselves.

I dated one of those briefly. He had a high school diploma, no college.
He lived in a small town outside of Atlanta. He complained a lot about
how his job at a warehouse didn't provide a living wage, so he had to
have roommates, and there weren't enough good jobs available in his
town, and that it wasn't fair and the government should do something
about it.

When I suggested he could go to college or a technical school to get
training for a better job, he said it would be too hard to go to school
and work at the same time. He said his parents would support him while
he was in school, let him move back home, but he didn't think it was
fair that they'd expect him to live by "their rules" while he was doing
so. I suggested he might find better work opportunities in Atlanta, and
he said that he didn't want to leave behind his high school buddies.

The last straw was when we were on our way to a movie and we had to stop
at a red light and he whined that this always happens to him and cited
it as another example of the government keeping him down. His attitude
was warped, and sadly I've seen it in dozens of other people. This
expectation that the government's job should be to fix all of life's
problems is what saddens me.

--
http://www.mindspring.com/~lunachick

Bob (this one) said:

Quoted message said:

Bob (this one) wrote:

<snip>

Quoted message said:

When it doesn't, it's typing practice.

Pastorio

More like mental masturbation.

This from Dr. "Refreshingly transtheoretical..." Isn't it grand when a
Ph.D. in psychology can lower himself to the level of a beerjoint
people-wizard and just be one of the guys...?

Ya think?

Pastorio

Are you two done measuring each others penises?

Roger Zoul said:

[email hidden] wrote:
:> Luna wrote:
:> > In article <[email hidden]>,
:> > [email hidden] wrote:
:> >
:> > > Luna wrote:
:> > >
:> > > <snip>
:> > >
:> > > >
:> > > > I never even noticed. I guess I was paying more attention to
:> > > > the content than the style.
:> > > >
:> > > > --
:> > > > http://www.mindspring.com/~lunachick
:> > >
:> > > Perhaps I do have low self-esteem, but here goes anyways: I
:> > > find Bob's posts irritating for exactly the above reason. His
:> > > posts (.50 cent words and all) are like a big beautiful car with
:> > > no engine in it.
:> >
:> > Huh. While I agree with approximately .05% of his positions, I can
:> > follow his logic quite easily. We just operate from different
:> > postulates.
:>
:> I don't necessarily disagree with you. However, he still seems to
:> use quite a lot of words to elucidate a what in the end is a pretty
:> simplistic position (e.g., neoliberal political philosophy).

If there are too many words, don't read them.

Done.

I'm no good at responding to Bob's usenet equivalent of the document
dump. The oozing sarcasm, ad hominems and swear words don't help
either...

Bob (this one) said:

Quoted message said:

Luna said:

In article <[email hidden]>,
[email hidden] wrote:

>Luna wrote:
>
><snip>
>
>>I never even noticed. I guess I was paying more attention to the
>>content than the style.
>>
>>--
>>http://www.mindspring.com/~lunachick
>
> Perhaps I do have low self-esteem, but here goes anyways: I find
>Bob's posts irritating for exactly the above reason. His posts (.50
>cent words and all) are like a big beautiful car with no engine in it.

Huh. While I agree with approximately .05% of his positions, I can
follow his logic quite easily. We just operate from different
postulates.

I don't necessarily disagree with you. However, he still seems to use
quite a lot of words to elucidate a what in the end is a pretty
simplistic position (e.g., neoliberal political philosophy).

As opposed to a political philosophy that has no practical components
for delivering the mail,

All, right, I'm going to comment as a lurking libertarian here.

Allow FedEx and UPS to operate on a level playing field with USPS and
they'll do the job just fine.

Quoted message said:

constructing highways,

Private highways. Lots of 'em.

Quoted message said:

making national parks,

From what I understand, a national park isn't "made," its merely
natural areas that are declared off-limits by an act of government for
development. You ever heard of the Nature Conservancy? They do the same
thing....

Quoted message said:

patrolling borders,

Sounds like that's no problem for government to do...

Quoted message said:

controlling waterways...

Likewise.

Quoted message said:

As for my approach being simplistic, it has both practical and
consistent philosophical elements.

You've been consistent, I think Dr. Ernie would agree. But the
quibble is the issue of practicality. There are government failures and
their are economic and free-market failures. It looks like your quibble
with him is over what is a greater problem.

Quoted message said:

Thus far, your philosophy has been
against government,

Yah. He's a libertarian.

Quoted message said:

against societally organized actions,

Hm. I don't think so. At least, that's not what libertarians are
against - societally organized actions, at least consensual ones, are
OK.

Quoted message said:

against
massive programs.

I don't think libertarians really care about the size of anything
either.

Quoted message said:

You talk about the individual as the action element
and offer no ways that individual can deal with needs large than the one
person's capacities.

Add 'em up. A whole is the sum of its parts.

Quoted message said:

And you talk about charities and their good works
as examples of how things should be but seem unable to say how the
12,000 Kodak employees who have been displaced should be dealt with,
both for them and their families, and the society and its economy.

Didn't he mention job retraining, feeding their families, and giving
them housing?

Quoted message said:

Try to peddle that condescending tone, if you can, but without anything
more substantial than dismissing useful and practical ideas but offering
none of your own, it sure looks like a hollow position you've taken.
Only being *against* is a "simplistic" position.

You really want to pound this dude into the dirt, don't you.

Quoted message said:

Pastorio

SzaszFan said:

Bob (this one) said:

Quoted message said:

Luna wrote:

>In article <[email hidden]>,
> [email hidden] wrote:
>
>
>>Luna wrote:
>>
>><snip>
>>
>>>I never even noticed. I guess I was paying more attention to the
>>>content than the style.
>>>
>>>--
>>>http://www.mindspring.com/~lunachick
>>
>> Perhaps I do have low self-esteem, but here goes anyways: I find
>>Bob's posts irritating for exactly the above reason. His posts (.50
>>cent words and all) are like a big beautiful car with no engine in it.
>
>Huh. While I agree with approximately .05% of his positions, I can
>follow his logic quite easily. We just operate from different
>postulates.

I don't necessarily disagree with you. However, he still seems to use
quite a lot of words to elucidate a what in the end is a pretty
simplistic position (e.g., neoliberal political philosophy).

As opposed to a political philosophy that has no practical components
for delivering the mail,

All, right, I'm going to comment as a lurking libertarian here.

<snip>

(ducks his head)

Luna said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

Bob (this one) said:

Quoted message said:

Luna wrote:

>In article <[email hidden]>,
> [email hidden] wrote:
>
>
>>Luna wrote:
>>
>><snip>
>>
>>>I never even noticed. I guess I was paying more attention to the
>>>content than the style.
>>>
>>>--
>>>http://www.mindspring.com/~lunachick
>>
>> Perhaps I do have low self-esteem, but here goes anyways: I find
>>Bob's posts irritating for exactly the above reason. His posts (.50
>>cent words and all) are like a big beautiful car with no engine in it.
>
>Huh. While I agree with approximately .05% of his positions, I can
>follow his logic quite easily. We just operate from different
>postulates.

I don't necessarily disagree with you. However, he still seems to use
quite a lot of words to elucidate a what in the end is a pretty
simplistic position (e.g., neoliberal political philosophy).

As opposed to a political philosophy that has no practical components
for delivering the mail, constructing highways, making national parks,
patrolling borders, controlling waterways...

I hope you're not talking about me. We both think the government should
collect taxes to pay for necessities, we just don't agree on what is a
necessity and what isn't.

<snip>

Exactly. Although I'm more or less for open borders, it seems quite
necessary for the government to patrol the borders and waterways,
national security and all. Whether the rest of these things are
necessary for government to be doing is debatable. But not by me.
Someone else take over, Bob is exhausting me.

Quoted message said:

This
expectation that the government's job should be to fix all of life's
problems is what saddens me.

Yup.

Quoted message said:

--
http://www.mindspring.com/~lunachick

SzaszFan said:

Are you two done measuring each others penises?

Want in?

Pastorio

SzaszFan said:

All, right, I'm going to comment as a lurking libertarian here.

Allow FedEx and UPS to operate on a level playing field with USPS and
they'll do the job just fine.

Perhaps so, perhaps not. I've had good and bad experiences with all of
them.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

constructing highways,

Private highways. Lots of 'em.

Right. What percentage of all roads would that be? What does "private
highways" mean? And you surely can't be saying that it's a practical way
to do it. Who builds Elm street and Main street and that strip of
highway that finally gets built up with shops and houses over the next
40 years? The one that connects two country towns?

The government paid for Columbus. And most major explorers through history.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

making national parks,

From what I understand, a national park isn't "made," its merely
natural areas that are declared off-limits by an act of government for
development. You ever heard of the Nature Conservancy? They do the same
thing....

Not quite so simple. Go to Yellowstone and try to get around. It's vast.
Signs? Bathrooms? Food? Roads? And a whole lot more.

Wilderness isn't the same thing as a national park. The nature
Conservancy is a good influence, but they couldn't begin to keep the
parks near where I live going.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

patrolling borders,

Sounds like that's no problem for government to do...

Really? So catching the guy with the carload of explosives at the
Canadian border wasn't really necessary? So what if a few hundred
thousand Los Angelenos were going to have their lives snuffed or
savagely altered by his planned explosion. And illegals coming over the
southern border at the rate of more than a million a year don't matter?

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

controlling waterways...

Likewise.

So keeping the Mississippi open and navigable isn't all that important?

Harbors, too? Where all that stuff we import and export has to go.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

As for my approach being simplistic, it has both practical and
consistent philosophical elements.

You've been consistent, I think Dr. Ernie would agree. But the
quibble is the issue of practicality. There are government failures and
their are economic and free-market failures. It looks like your quibble
with him is over what is a greater problem.

I'm not sure that's a complete summary. There are problems in every
human endeavor but that's no reason not to try. There is no free market.
When there has been, it's been prostituted by the crooks and scammers -
read about Rockefeller, Ford, Gould and the other "robber barons" - and
read "Piers the Plowman" from around 1365. Crooks and scammers back
then, too. But the point is that without constraints, it's Ponzi all
over again. So the SEC. Without constraints, it's tainted and impure
food. So the FDA and USDA. These and other organizations are far from
perfect, but they exercise restraints against very specific abuses that
existed in the past. They weren't created for no reason. And, even with
the agencies, those same abuses and lots of new ones still happen. But
they're why every now and again, a few thousand pounds of
listeria-infected meat is spotted and recalled.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Thus far, your philosophy has been
against government,

Yah. He's a libertarian.

Quoted message said:

against societally organized actions,

Hm. I don't think so. At least, that's not what libertarians are
against - societally organized actions, at least consensual ones, are
OK.

Yeah. He said that. But the departure is what actions are in the
interest not only of the individual, but of the group and how they get done.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

against
massive programs.

I don't think libertarians really care about the size of anything
either.

If the comments here are an indication, they do. When I mentioned large
programs, ernie sneered and said I think bigger is better. The fact is
that I've seen value in large-scale programs that neither individuals
nor business nor any combination would do because it's not going to
return money on the investment. I cited rural electrification as a good
example of this. Toxic waste cleanup - the result of free market dumping
before there were laws against it.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

You talk about the individual as the action element
and offer no ways that individual can deal with needs large than the one
person's capacities.

Add 'em up. A whole is the sum of its parts.

Don't be simplistic. The whole as envisioned by this libertarian
viewpoint has no mechanism for building a hydroelectric dam. No coherent
mechanism for building airports. No mechanism for dealing with large
national emergencies - 9/11, every hurricane, earthquakes, floods.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

And you talk about charities and their good works
as examples of how things should be but seem unable to say how the
12,000 Kodak employees who have been displaced should be dealt with,
both for them and their families, and the society and its economy.

Didn't he mention job retraining, feeding their families, and giving
them housing?

Yes. He did. But we never got to how many people the charities are
dealing with out of how many there are. And we never dealt with the
stigma of being given charity. Middle-class people are resistant to
charity for themselves because it implies failure and helplessness. It's
embarrassing and stigmatizing and usually won't be even explored until
their conditions are desperate. No one goes cheerfully to ask for lunch
and a place to sleep for their families.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Try to peddle that condescending tone, if you can, but without anything
more substantial than dismissing useful and practical ideas but offering
none of your own, it sure looks like a hollow position you've taken.
Only being *against* is a "simplistic" position.

You really want to pound this dude into the dirt, don't you.

This dude can handle himself just fine. Does a good bit of his own pounding.

Pastorio

Suze said:

Quoting Max Hollywood Harris:

Quoted message said:

I'll put my degree,

Max, I've noticed that you've signed several of your posts with
"Resident MBA" or phrases to that effect and have mentioned or alluded
to your degree a few times as well. Why?

In this instance, my intelligence was questioned. I offered a
credential as proof of intelligence. I will allow some suggestion that
intelligence is inate and not acquired, but I would suggest that very
few idiots could manage two years of heavy business theory with heavy
quantitative components, so my degree should serve as a signal to the
inate intelligence. Or at least that I'm a pretty rare idiot ;-)

I have noted my MBA in three types of occasions.
1- In reintroducing myself to the community. I talked about what I've
been up to in the last two years. A few people remain and at least one
person noted their curiosity.

2- In talking about matters of LC business or the underlying economics.
Perhaps a little insecurity is revealed, but I feel it gives a little
more weight to my thoughts. This is the only instance I have referred
to myself as the "resident MBA". If there are other MBA's in the
community who object to that moniker, contact me by email, and I will
work something more accceptible.

3- In defending my intelligence to those who might question it. I've
already explored the flaws in that line of thought, but I think it's a
valid indicator, especially considering that only 5% of Americans
complete a Master level or higher degree.

I did complete my degree recently, so am still full of pride about it,
so maybe there's a little bit of that in my mentions. That said, I'm
not appologetic about mentioning it in any instance thus far. I'm sorry
if people think it's self aggrandizing, but life is like that.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

my mensa membership,

Why mention something like this?

Again, because of the question of my mental capabilities.

This reference apparently caused a small stir in the group.
Specifically:
Dr. Ernie: "What a pretentious thing though. 'I'm in a club for smart
people.'"

Suze: "It also comes across as incredibly insecure. 'I'm smrt, I'm
smrt! Really, I am...'"(sic)

Luna: "I think it's kind of stupid to pay membership dues just to make
friends."

Since there is so much interest:
http://www.mensa.org/index0.php?page=11

Luna: I get all that for a dollar a week. I don't belong to a church
and I don't frequent bars often, so I look at it as a net cost savings
on the meeting people, with the upside of having a filter that keeps
conversations at a pretty high level, at least in terms of underlying
logic. I think it's kind of stupid to go to bars, pay for drinks until
people are smart, interesting, or pretty, but a large chunk of society
thinks that's the way to do it. Different strokes for dfferent folks.
And I am not suggesting that Luna is a drunk, or even enjoys bars, or
that she is wrong for doing so or not doing so.

I'm sorry that Dr. Ernie believes it's pretentious. I'm unsure if it's
the actual membership he objects to or the mention of the membership. I
really enjoy the benefits of membership, much as Dr. Ernie probably
enjoys membership in the AMA, which is, at its base, a club for smart
people who happen to work in medicine. I'm sure there are differences,
but I get a journal that catalogs findings from a diverse set of
members in a diverse set of fields. Kinda like JAMA, only less
specialized. If it's the mention, I would note the context of the
mention as the reason for the mention (evidence of intelligence).

Suzy: In the context of the mention, I suppose maybe there is some room
for insecurity. I was not trying to self-aggrandize, but merely defend.
But, if I were saying it your way, I'd say, "I'm smart! I'm smart!
Please believe it." In my real life, I don't care if people think of me
as smart when we meet, but I want them to know it in time. I also don't
care if I'm the smartest person in the room, or the dumbest. I just
like being smart. It probably goes with my personality profile, which
involves internal thinking as my dominant attribute.

For JC, and the others who note the Latin American Spanish meaning for
Mensa, I will give you the wikipedia thought on this:
"Mensa's name was once planned to be Mens, Latin for "mind," but this
was potentially confusing. Mensa's name may also seem ironic in parts
of Latin America, where menso (feminine: mensa) means "stupid". Mensa
is however also very close to the Spanish word for "table", mesa, and
most Spanish speakers do not see anything wrong with the name. Mensa is
Latin for table. Mensa is also the Italian word for canteen, as well as
the German word for cafeteria, and mens is Dutch for human."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mensa_International#Trivia

Since the actual speakers of the language see nothing wrong with it,
I'll take their word over yours.

-Max L Harris (Hollywood) Since 7/20/05 264/255/218
Master of Business Administration, 2005
John M. Olin School of Business at Washington University in Saint Louis

"Truly, for some men nothing is written unless THEY write it."
-T.E. Lawrence, Robert Bolt and Michael Wilson. Spoken by Omar Sharif
as Sherif Ali in "Lawrence of Arabia"

Suze said:

Quoting Max Hollywood Harris:

Quoted message said:

I'll put my degree,

Max, I've noticed that you've signed several of your posts with
"Resident MBA" or phrases to that effect and have mentioned or alluded
to your degree a few times as well. Why?

In this instance, my intelligence was questioned. I offered a
credential as proof of intelligence. I will allow some suggestion that
intelligence is innate and not acquired, but I would suggest that very
few idiots could manage two years of heavy business theory with heavy
quantitative components, so my degree should serve as a signal to the
innate intelligence. Or at least that I'm a pretty rare idiot ;-)

I have noted my MBA in three types of occasions.
1- In reintroducing myself to the community. I talked about what I've
been up to in the last two years. A few people remain and at least one
person noted their curiosity.

2- In talking about matters of LC business or the underlying economics.
Perhaps a little insecurity is revealed, but I feel it gives a little
more weight to my thoughts. This is the only instance I have referred
to myself as the "resident MBA". If there are other MBA's in the
community who object to that moniker, contact me by email, and I will
work something more acceptable.

3- In defending my intelligence to those who might question it. I've
already explored the flaws in that line of thought, but I think it's a
valid indicator, especially considering that only 5% of Americans
complete a Master level or higher degree.

I did complete my degree recently, so am still full of pride about it,
so maybe there's a little bit of that in my mentions. That said, I'm
not apologetic about mentioning it in any instance thus far. I'm sorry
if people think it's self aggrandizing, but life is like that.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

my mensa membership,

Why mention something like this?

Again, because of the question of my mental capabilities.

This reference apparently caused a small stir in the group.
Specifically:
Dr. Ernie: "What a pretentious thing though. 'I'm in a club for smart
people.'"

Suze: "It also comes across as incredibly insecure. 'I'm smrt, I'm
smrt! Really, I am...'"(sic)

Luna: "I think it's kind of stupid to pay membership dues just to make
friends."

Since there is so much interest:
http://www.mensa.org/index0.php?page=11

Luna: I get all that for a dollar a week. I don't belong to a church
and I don't frequent bars often, so I look at it as a net cost savings
on the meeting people, with the upside of having a filter that keeps
conversations at a pretty high level, at least in terms of underlying
logic. I think it's kind of stupid to go to bars, pay for drinks until
people are smart, interesting, or pretty, but a large chunk of society
thinks that's the way to do it. Different strokes for different folks.
And I am not suggesting that Luna is a drunk, or even enjoys bars, or
that she is wrong for doing so or not doing so.

I'm sorry that Dr. Ernie believes it's pretentious. I'm unsure if it's
the actual membership he objects to or the mention of the membership. I
really enjoy the benefits of membership, much as Dr. Ernie probably
enjoys membership in the AMA, which is, at its base, a club for smart
people who happen to work in medicine. I'm sure there are differences,
but I get a journal that catalogs findings from a diverse set of
members in a diverse set of fields. Kinda like JAMA, only less
specialized. If it's the mention, I would note the context of the
mention as the reason for the mention (evidence of intelligence).

Suzy: In the context of the mention, I suppose maybe there is some room
for insecurity. I was not trying to self-aggrandize, but merely defend.
But, if I were saying it your way, I'd say, "I'm smart! I'm smart!
Please believe it." In my real life, I don't care if people think of me
as smart when we meet, but I want them to know it in time. I also don't
care if I'm the smartest person in the room, or the dumbest. I just
like being smart. It probably goes with my personality profile, which
involves internal thinking as my dominant attribute.

For JC, and the others who note the Latin American Spanish meaning for
Mensa, I will give you the wikipedia thought on this:
"Mensa's name was once planned to be Mens, Latin for "mind," but this
was potentially confusing. Mensa's name may also seem ironic in parts
of Latin America, where menso (feminine: mensa) means "stupid". Mensa
is however also very close to the Spanish word for "table", mesa, and
most Spanish speakers do not see anything wrong with the name. Mensa is
Latin for table. Mensa is also the Italian word for canteen, as well as
the German word for cafeteria, and mens is Dutch for human."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mensa_International#Trivia

Since the actual speakers of the language see nothing wrong with it,
I'll take their word over yours.

-Max L Harris (Hollywood) Since 7/20/05 264/255/218
Master of Business Administration, 2005
John M. Olin School of Business at Washington University in Saint Louis

"Truly, for some men nothing is written unless THEY write it."
-T.E. Lawrence, Robert Bolt and Michael Wilson. Spoken by Omar Sharif
as Sherif Ali in "Lawrence of Arabia"

Max -

This is usenet. People on here will call anyone an idiot. Trying to
disprove that you're an idiot will only get you called that again. You'd be
well advised not to waste your efforts on such. Either ignore such comments
or hurl a few bolts of your own. 🙂 It's a cultural thing, AFAIC.

Max Hollywood Harris wrote:
:: Suze wrote:
::: Quoting Max Hollywood Harris:
:::: I'll put my degree,
:::
::: Max, I've noticed that you've signed several of your posts with
::: "Resident MBA" or phrases to that effect and have mentioned or
::: alluded to your degree a few times as well. Why?
::
:: In this instance, my intelligence was questioned. I offered a
:: credential as proof of intelligence. I will allow some suggestion
:: that intelligence is inate and not acquired, but I would suggest
:: that very few idiots could manage two years of heavy business theory
:: with heavy quantitative components, so my degree should serve as a
:: signal to the inate intelligence. Or at least that I'm a pretty rare
:: idiot ;-)
::
:: I have noted my MBA in three types of occasions.
:: 1- In reintroducing myself to the community. I talked about what I've
:: been up to in the last two years. A few people remain and at least
:: one person noted their curiosity.
::
:: 2- In talking about matters of LC business or the underlying
:: economics. Perhaps a little insecurity is revealed, but I feel it
:: gives a little more weight to my thoughts. This is the only instance
:: I have referred to myself as the "resident MBA". If there are other
:: MBA's in the community who object to that moniker, contact me by
:: email, and I will work something more accceptible.
::
:: 3- In defending my intelligence to those who might question it. I've
:: already explored the flaws in that line of thought, but I think it's
:: a valid indicator, especially considering that only 5% of Americans
:: complete a Master level or higher degree.
::
:: I did complete my degree recently, so am still full of pride about
:: it, so maybe there's a little bit of that in my mentions. That said,
:: I'm not appologetic about mentioning it in any instance thus far.
:: I'm sorry if people think it's self aggrandizing, but life is like
:: that.
::
:::: my mensa membership,
:::
::: Why mention something like this?
::
:: Again, because of the question of my mental capabilities.
::
:: This reference apparently caused a small stir in the group.
:: Specifically:
:: Dr. Ernie: "What a pretentious thing though. 'I'm in a club for smart
:: people.'"
::
:: Suze: "It also comes across as incredibly insecure. 'I'm smrt, I'm
:: smrt! Really, I am...'"(sic)
::
:: Luna: "I think it's kind of stupid to pay membership dues just to
:: make friends."
::
:: Since there is so much interest:
:: http://www.mensa.org/index0.php?page=11
::
:: Luna: I get all that for a dollar a week. I don't belong to a church
:: and I don't frequent bars often, so I look at it as a net cost
:: savings on the meeting people, with the upside of having a filter
:: that keeps conversations at a pretty high level, at least in terms
:: of underlying logic. I think it's kind of stupid to go to bars, pay
:: for drinks until people are smart, interesting, or pretty, but a
:: large chunk of society thinks that's the way to do it. Different
:: strokes for dfferent folks. And I am not suggesting that Luna is a
:: drunk, or even enjoys bars, or that she is wrong for doing so or not
:: doing so.
::
:: I'm sorry that Dr. Ernie believes it's pretentious. I'm unsure if
:: it's the actual membership he objects to or the mention of the
:: membership. I really enjoy the benefits of membership, much as Dr.
:: Ernie probably enjoys membership in the AMA, which is, at its base,
:: a club for smart people who happen to work in medicine. I'm sure
:: there are differences, but I get a journal that catalogs findings
:: from a diverse set of members in a diverse set of fields. Kinda like
:: JAMA, only less specialized. If it's the mention, I would note the
:: context of the mention as the reason for the mention (evidence of
:: intelligence).
::
:: Suzy: In the context of the mention, I suppose maybe there is some
:: room for insecurity. I was not trying to self-aggrandize, but merely
:: defend. But, if I were saying it your way, I'd say, "I'm smart! I'm
:: smart! Please believe it." In my real life, I don't care if people
:: think of me as smart when we meet, but I want them to know it in
:: time. I also don't care if I'm the smartest person in the room, or
:: the dumbest. I just like being smart. It probably goes with my
:: personality profile, which involves internal thinking as my dominant
:: attribute.
::
:: For JC, and the others who note the Latin American Spanish meaning
:: for Mensa, I will give you the wikipedia thought on this:
:: "Mensa's name was once planned to be Mens, Latin for "mind," but this
:: was potentially confusing. Mensa's name may also seem ironic in parts
:: of Latin America, where menso (feminine: mensa) means "stupid". Mensa
:: is however also very close to the Spanish word for "table", mesa, and
:: most Spanish speakers do not see anything wrong with the name. Mensa
:: is Latin for table. Mensa is also the Italian word for canteen, as
:: well as the German word for cafeteria, and mens is Dutch for human."
:: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mensa_International#Trivia
::
:: Since the actual speakers of the language see nothing wrong with it,
:: I'll take their word over yours.
::
:: -Max L Harris (Hollywood) Since 7/20/05 264/255/218
:: Master of Business Administration, 2005
:: John M. Olin School of Business at Washington University in Saint
:: Louis
::
:: "Truly, for some men nothing is written unless THEY write it."
:: -T.E. Lawrence, Robert Bolt and Michael Wilson. Spoken by Omar Sharif
:: as Sherif Ali in "Lawrence of Arabia"