>On 8/3/2012 11:49 PM, LonVanOstran wrote:
>> nothermark wrote:
>>> Either your reading comprehension is too
>>> low to make the connection or your nasty attitude causes you to
>>> purposely clip it out of context.
>> There's another choice.
>> Your writing ability is so poor that you haven't the slightest clue
>> regarding what was meant by what you wrote. I've buying that one.
>> Lon
>Since hardly a day goes by when he is not complaining that he was >"misinterpreted", you would think he would work harder at making himself >clear. As I said before, he writes like someone who has never been >required to write with clarity so that people always understand him. He >writes like an engineer.
Thank you. Engineers have to write for clarity.
I don't think I have pulled out the misinterpreted card more than a
couple of times. When I did it was usually because somebody like Lon
tried to include China in a comment about how hot an issue birth
control is when we were talking about the US.
I have complained when folks purposely distort what I said.
What I find really interesting is that if you word something poorly it
is my reading comprehension that is the problem according to you.
> Since hardly a day goes by when he is not complaining that he was
> "misinterpreted", you would think he would work harder at making himself
> clear. As I said before, he writes like someone who has never been
> required to write with clarity so that people always understand him. He
> writes like an engineer.
Bruce:
Since you are normally a very sensible contributor, I wonder what possessed you to drop such an unjustified remark! While some engineer may write incoherently, the good ones (virtually by necessity) write with clarity and logic.
The moron you are referring to could not engineer his way out of a paper sack with a flamethrower and a bulldozer.
> On 8/4/12 12:00 PM, Bruce S wrote re "nothermark"
> > Since hardly a day goes by when he is not complaining that he was
>> "misinterpreted", you would think he would work harder at making himself
>> clear. As I said before, he writes like someone who has never been
>> required to write with clarity so that people always understand him. He
>> writes like an engineer.
> Bruce:
> Since you are normally a very sensible contributor, I wonder what
> possessed you to drop such an unjustified remark! While some engineer
> may write incoherently, the good ones (virtually by necessity) write
> with clarity and logic.
> The moron you are referring to could not engineer his way out of a paper
> sack with a flamethrower and a bulldozer.
> Will
My experience has been that engineers tend to write for other engineers, and therefore what they write is filled with jargon, abbreviations and insider information, making it fine for other engineers, but worthless to the rest of the world.
If I am mistaken, I apologize to those engineers who are able to write. ;-)
-- Bruce
"The free market punishes irresponsibility. Government rewards it." Harry Browne
In other shocking news, if it wasn't bad enough that the poorest 20% comprise a fifth of all citizens, they're ALSO in the bottom quintile!
> My experience has been that engineers tend to write for other engineers,
> and therefore what they write is filled with jargon, abbreviations and
> insider information, making it fine for other engineers, but worthless
> to the rest of the world.
> If I am mistaken, I apologize to those engineers who are able to write.
> ;-)
Respectfully, you are mistaken. You're mistaken for the simple reason that its always a mistake to assume that all members of a group are alike.
As a general rule, engineers MUST clearly articulate their ideas for non-engineers (designers, draftsmen, financial resources, installers, and even politicians) and not merely for other engineers. I don't doubt you've encountered people with poor communication skills who call themselves engineers. But the same can be said for virtually any occupation. "Nothermark" (regardless of his claimed profession) is a communist propagandist and an incompetent human being.
On Sun, 05 Aug 2012 07:45:20 -0400, Will Sill <w...@epix.net> wrote:
>On 8/4/12 9:17 PM, Bruce S wrote:
>> My experience has been that engineers tend to write for other engineers,
>> and therefore what they write is filled with jargon, abbreviations and
>> insider information, making it fine for other engineers, but worthless
>> to the rest of the world.
>> If I am mistaken, I apologize to those engineers who are able to write.
>> ;-)
>Respectfully, you are mistaken. You're mistaken for the simple reason >that its always a mistake to assume that all members of a group are alike.
>As a general rule, engineers MUST clearly articulate their ideas for >non-engineers (designers, draftsmen, financial resources, installers, >and even politicians) and not merely for other engineers. I don't doubt >you've encountered people with poor communication skills who call >themselves engineers. But the same can be said for virtually any >occupation. "Nothermark" (regardless of his claimed profession) is a >communist propagandist and an incompetent human being.
>Will
I am not and have never been a communist. OTOH if you were much of an
engineer you would be able to run the numbers and show where I am
wrong or come up with a better approach.
>> My experience has been that engineers tend to write for other engineers,
>> and therefore what they write is filled with jargon, abbreviations and
>> insider information, making it fine for other engineers, but worthless
>> to the rest of the world.
>> If I am mistaken, I apologize to those engineers who are able to write.
>> ;-)
> Respectfully, you are mistaken. You're mistaken for the simple reason
> that its always a mistake to assume that all members of a group are alike.
> As a general rule, engineers MUST clearly articulate their ideas for
> non-engineers (designers, draftsmen, financial resources, installers,
> and even politicians) and not merely for other engineers. I don't doubt
> you've encountered people with poor communication skills who call
> themselves engineers. But the same can be said for virtually any
> occupation. "Nothermark" (regardless of his claimed profession) is a
> communist propagandist and an incompetent human being.
> Will
I can't disagree with you at all.
-- Bruce
"The free market punishes irresponsibility. Government rewards it." Harry Browne
In other shocking news, if it wasn't bad enough that the poorest 20% comprise a fifth of all citizens, they're ALSO in the bottom quintile!
>On 8/5/2012 4:45 AM, Will Sill wrote:
>> On 8/4/12 9:17 PM, Bruce S wrote:
>>> My experience has been that engineers tend to write for other engineers,
>>> and therefore what they write is filled with jargon, abbreviations and
>>> insider information, making it fine for other engineers, but worthless
>>> to the rest of the world.
>>> If I am mistaken, I apologize to those engineers who are able to write.
>>> ;-)
>> Respectfully, you are mistaken. You're mistaken for the simple reason
>> that its always a mistake to assume that all members of a group are alike.
>> As a general rule, engineers MUST clearly articulate their ideas for
>> non-engineers (designers, draftsmen, financial resources, installers,
>> and even politicians) and not merely for other engineers. I don't doubt
>> you've encountered people with poor communication skills who call
>> themselves engineers. But the same can be said for virtually any
>> occupation. "Nothermark" (regardless of his claimed profession) is a
>> communist propagandist and an incompetent human being.
>> Will
>I can't disagree with you at all.
So anybody who does not mindlessly cling to ultra right wing dogma
must be a communist???
> So anybody who does not mindlessly cling to ultra right wing dogma
> must be a communist???
No, in your case, it is your mindless adherence to communist dogma that makes you a communist. From each according to his ability, to each according to his need.
-- Bruce
"The free market punishes irresponsibility. Government rewards it." – Harry Browne
In other shocking news, if it wasn't bad enough that the poorest 20% comprise a fifth of all citizens, they're ALSO in the bottom quintile!
On Sun, 05 Aug 2012 15:17:29 -0700, Bruce S <bruce.sn...@gmail.com>
wrote:
>On 8/5/2012 10:26 AM, nothermark wrote:
>> So anybody who does not mindlessly cling to ultra right wing dogma
>> must be a communist???
>No, in your case, it is your mindless adherence to communist dogma that >makes you a communist. From each according to his ability, to each >according to his need.
That is far from what I believe. In fact I do not think you can find
me endorsing that anywhere. I know you can find me telling you
otherwise. Yet you keep dragging it out.
On Sun, 05 Aug 2012 15:17:29 -0700, Bruce S <bruce.sn...@gmail.com>
wrote:
>On 8/5/2012 10:26 AM, nothermark wrote:
>> So anybody who does not mindlessly cling to ultra right wing dogma
>> must be a communist???
>No, in your case, it is your mindless adherence to communist dogma that >makes you a communist. From each according to his ability, to each >according to his need.
-----------------------------
That is absolutely Mark's creed. He does not say it in those exact
words but that is what he writes virtually every time he posts.
> On Sun, 05 Aug 2012 15:17:29 -0700, Bruce S <bruce.sn...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>> On 8/5/2012 10:26 AM, nothermark wrote:
>>> So anybody who does not mindlessly cling to ultra right wing dogma
>>> must be a communist???
>> No, in your case, it is your mindless adherence to communist dogma that
>> makes you a communist. From each according to his ability, to each
>> according to his need.
> That is far from what I believe. In fact I do not think you can find
> me endorsing that anywhere. I know you can find me telling you
> otherwise. Yet you keep dragging it out.
I can find you endorsing it every time you endorse higher taxes for the "rich" and more social programs for the poor. Simply not using those words does not change the meaning of the words you do use.
-- Bruce
"The free market punishes irresponsibility. Government rewards it." – Harry Browne
In other shocking news, if it wasn't bad enough that the poorest 20% comprise a fifth of all citizens, they're ALSO in the bottom quintile!
> On Sun, 05 Aug 2012 15:17:29 -0700, Bruce S <bruce.sn...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>> On 8/5/2012 10:26 AM, nothermark wrote:
>>> So anybody who does not mindlessly cling to ultra right wing dogma
>>> must be a communist???
>> No, in your case, it is your mindless adherence to communist dogma that
>> makes you a communist. From each according to his ability, to each
>> according to his need.
> -----------------------------
> That is absolutely Mark's creed. He does not say it in those exact
> words but that is what he writes virtually every time he posts.
> mike
Agreed.
-- Bruce
"The free market punishes irresponsibility. Government rewards it." Harry Browne
In other shocking news, if it wasn't bad enough that the poorest 20% comprise a fifth of all citizens, they're ALSO in the bottom quintile!
(dot) us> wrote:
>On Sun, 05 Aug 2012 15:17:29 -0700, Bruce S <bruce.sn...@gmail.com>
>wrote:
>>On 8/5/2012 10:26 AM, nothermark wrote:
>>> So anybody who does not mindlessly cling to ultra right wing dogma
>>> must be a communist???
>>No, in your case, it is your mindless adherence to communist dogma that >>makes you a communist. From each according to his ability, to each >>according to his need.
>-----------------------------
>That is absolutely Mark's creed. He does not say it in those exact
>words but that is what he writes virtually every time he posts.
>mike
I don't know what I find more interesting, you saying that or your
refusal to discuss it. Either way you are totally wrong.
>On 8/5/2012 4:18 PM, nothermark wrote:
>> On Sun, 05 Aug 2012 15:17:29 -0700, Bruce S <bruce.sn...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>> On 8/5/2012 10:26 AM, nothermark wrote:
>>>> So anybody who does not mindlessly cling to ultra right wing dogma
>>>> must be a communist???
>>> No, in your case, it is your mindless adherence to communist dogma that
>>> makes you a communist. From each according to his ability, to each
>>> according to his need.
>> That is far from what I believe. In fact I do not think you can find
>> me endorsing that anywhere. I know you can find me telling you
>> otherwise. Yet you keep dragging it out.
>I can find you endorsing it every time you endorse higher taxes for the >"rich" and more social programs for the poor. Simply not using those >words does not change the meaning of the words you do use.
What you are describing is not Communism. You need to work on your
definitions.
If you need a definition I would call it basic humanity or the social
contract.
>On 8/5/2012 5:54 PM, Mike Hendrix wrote:
>> On Sun, 05 Aug 2012 15:17:29 -0700, Bruce S <bruce.sn...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>> On 8/5/2012 10:26 AM, nothermark wrote:
>>>> So anybody who does not mindlessly cling to ultra right wing dogma
>>>> must be a communist???
>>> No, in your case, it is your mindless adherence to communist dogma that
>>> makes you a communist. From each according to his ability, to each
>>> according to his need.
>> -----------------------------
>> That is absolutely Mark's creed. He does not say it in those exact
>> words but that is what he writes virtually every time he posts.
>> mike
>Agreed.
Figured you would. Too bad neither of you know what you are talking
about.
> On Sun, 05 Aug 2012 18:40:16 -0700, Bruce S <bruce.sn...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>> On 8/5/2012 4:18 PM, nothermark wrote:
>>> On Sun, 05 Aug 2012 15:17:29 -0700, Bruce S <bruce.sn...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>> On 8/5/2012 10:26 AM, nothermark wrote:
>>>>> So anybody who does not mindlessly cling to ultra right wing dogma
>>>>> must be a communist???
>>>> No, in your case, it is your mindless adherence to communist dogma that
>>>> makes you a communist. From each according to his ability, to each
>>>> according to his need.
>>> That is far from what I believe. In fact I do not think you can find
>>> me endorsing that anywhere. I know you can find me telling you
>>> otherwise. Yet you keep dragging it out.
>> I can find you endorsing it every time you endorse higher taxes for the
>> "rich" and more social programs for the poor. Simply not using those
>> words does not change the meaning of the words you do use.
> What you are describing is not Communism. You need to work on your
> definitions.
> If you need a definition I would call it basic humanity or the social
> contract.
You need to read a little Karl Marx and discover the meaning of what you believe. "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need" is the basic credo of communism.
To make life easier, try to remember that every time you hear the words "social justice", you are hearing an endorsement of communism.
-- Bruce
"The free market punishes irresponsibility. Government rewards it." – Harry Browne
In other shocking news, if it wasn't bad enough that the poorest 20% comprise a fifth of all citizens, they're ALSO in the bottom quintile!
nothermark wrote:
> If you need a definition I would call it basic humanity or the social
> contract.
Putting a hat on your donkey and calling it a horse doesn't change what it is. It may make you feel better about what you preach, but it still remains communism.
<Lvanost...@gmail.com> wrote:
>nothermark wrote:
>> If you need a definition I would call it basic humanity or the social
>> contract.
>Putting a hat on your donkey and calling it a horse doesn't change what >it is. It may make you feel better about what you preach, but it still >remains communism.
>Lon
NM thinks that he can pick up that turd by the clean end and paint a
Smiley on it and we won't notice that it is still a turd.
On Mon, 06 Aug 2012 07:30:16 -0500, Jerry Osage wrote:
>On Mon, 06 Aug 2012 05:06:43 -0400, LonVanOstran
><Lvanost...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>nothermark wrote:
>>> If you need a definition I would call it basic humanity or the social
>>> contract.
>>Putting a hat on your donkey and calling it a horse doesn't change what >>it is. It may make you feel better about what you preach, but it still >>remains communism.
>>Lon
>NM thinks that he can pick up that turd by the clean end and paint a
>Smiley on it and we won't notice that it is still a turd.
No, I know the difference between a centrally planned economy run by a
committee and a free society that provides some guidance and a safety
net. I also have enough of a handle on the result of not providing a
safety net to think that is the worst evil.
I also understand the economic consequences of exporting jobs instead
of products.
nothermark wrote:
> On Mon, 06 Aug 2012 07:30:16 -0500, Jerry Osage wrote:
>> On Mon, 06 Aug 2012 05:06:43 -0400, LonVanOstran
>> <Lvanost...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> nothermark wrote:
>>>> If you need a definition I would call it basic humanity or the
>>>> social contract.
>>> Putting a hat on your donkey and calling it a horse doesn't change
>>> what it is. It may make you feel better about what you preach, but
>>> it still remains communism.
>>> Lon
>> NM thinks that he can pick up that turd by the clean end and paint a
>> Smiley on it and we won't notice that it is still a turd.
> No, I know the difference between a centrally planned economy run by a
> committee and a free society that provides some guidance and a safety
> net. I also have enough of a handle on the result of not providing a
> safety net to think that is the worst evil.
> I also understand the economic consequences of exporting jobs instead
> of products.
I contend the worst evil is using force to fulfill someone else's needs. The only moral justification for the use of force is self defense and the arrest and apprehension of those who use force to fulfill their or others needs.
The vast majority of citzens use that code of conduct in their everyday life.
>nothermark wrote:
>> On Mon, 06 Aug 2012 07:30:16 -0500, Jerry Osage wrote:
>>> On Mon, 06 Aug 2012 05:06:43 -0400, LonVanOstran
>>> <Lvanost...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> nothermark wrote:
>>>>> If you need a definition I would call it basic humanity or the
>>>>> social contract.
>>>> Putting a hat on your donkey and calling it a horse doesn't change
>>>> what it is. It may make you feel better about what you preach, but
>>>> it still remains communism.
>>>> Lon
>>> NM thinks that he can pick up that turd by the clean end and paint a
>>> Smiley on it and we won't notice that it is still a turd.
>> No, I know the difference between a centrally planned economy run by a
>> committee and a free society that provides some guidance and a safety
>> net. I also have enough of a handle on the result of not providing a
>> safety net to think that is the worst evil.
>> I also understand the economic consequences of exporting jobs instead
>> of products.
>I contend the worst evil is using force to fulfill someone else's needs. The >only moral justification for the use of force is self defense and the arrest >and apprehension of those who use force to fulfill their or others needs.
>The vast majority of citzens use that code of conduct in their everyday >life.
You think feeding the poor is not a form of self defense by the rich?
nothermark wrote:
> On Mon, 06 Aug 2012 07:30:16 -0500, Jerry Osage wrote:
>> On Mon, 06 Aug 2012 05:06:43 -0400, LonVanOstran
>> <Lvanost...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> nothermark wrote:
>>>> If you need a definition I would call it basic humanity or the social
>>>> contract.
>>> Putting a hat on your donkey and calling it a horse doesn't change what
>>> it is. It may make you feel better about what you preach, but it still
>>> remains communism.
>>> Lon
>> NM thinks that he can pick up that turd by the clean end and paint a
>> Smiley on it and we won't notice that it is still a turd.
> No, I know the difference between a centrally planned economy run by a
> committee and a free society that provides some guidance and a safety
> net. I also have enough of a handle on the result of not providing a
> safety net to think that is the worst evil.
> I also understand the economic consequences of exporting jobs instead
> of products.
If you think Congress isn't a committee, then you are stupid.
