Revisiting "The Dumbest Generation"
Stray Dog
Many books, articles, etc., have come out in recent years that discussed
the decline in knowledge and skills among our younger generation.
Here is a book review out of tuesday's WSJ, Sept 9, 2008, page A23:
title: "Internet-Free And glad of It"
The review is by Paul Boutin
the book is "Anatem" (a novel) by Neal Stephenson
Here is a quote of the first paragraph:
"Is Google making us stupid? Intellectuals fret that the internet's
instant-answer machine may be making us dumber, as we learn to solve
problems without applying long-term mental effort. 'I'm not thinking the
way I used to think', worried technology pundit Nicholas Carr in a recent
Atlantic Monthly article. After 10 years of Internet immersion, Mr. Carr
finds that when he attempts to read a book his concentration wanes after
three pages. "
The rest of the article...find it yourself if you are interested.
Reminded me of Sir Thomas More's "Utopia" (of some 500 years ago).
Old Pif
> Many books, articles, etc., have come out in recent years that discussed
> the decline in knowledge and skills among our younger generation.
>
> Here is a book review out of tuesday's WSJ, Sept 9, 2008, page A23:
>
> title: "Internet-Free And glad of It"
>
> The review is by Paul Boutin
>
> the book is "Anatem" (a novel) by Neal Stephenson
>
> Here is a quote of the first paragraph:
>
> "Is Google making us stupid? Intellectuals fret that the internet's
> instant-answer machine may be making us dumber, as we learn to solve
> problems without applying long-term mental effort. 'I'm not thinking the
> way I used to think', worried technology pundit Nicholas Carr in a recent
> Atlantic Monthly article. After 10 years of Internet immersion, Mr. Carr
> finds that when he attempts to read a book his concentration wanes after
> three pages. "
>
It is a natural course of evolution. As Science is approaching its
end, all accumulated knowledge is depositing into giant distributed
database which is called Internet. And because all (substantial)
problems have been already solved people just need to learn how to get
what they need from the database. Apparently using Google.
Intellectual skills are gradually devaluating. Another traits take
their place. Sex appeal, wit ... all that stuff.
PeterBP
The pocket calculator did the same thing; people lose their mathematical
faculties because they lean on their TI's. Hom many people here have a
clear notion of now to multiply fx. 23x45 in their heads without use of
paper and pen?
--
- Peter *** http://titancity.com/
"Don't go around saying the world owes you a living. The world owes
you nothing. It was here first." - Mark Twain
Stray Dog
Pardon me, I misspelled the title. It is "Anathem." I might even be
interested to read it.
///////////////////////////
On Thu, 11 Sep 2008, PeterBP wrote:
> Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2008 02:25:05 +0200
> From: PeterBP <no...@jose.com>
> Newsgroups: alt.computer.consultants, alt.politics.economics, sci.econ,
> soc.culture.indian, sci.research.careers
> Subject: Re: Revisiting "The Dumbest Generation"
Les Cargill
Makes Mike Judge's "Idiocracy" look like prophecy, dunnit?
--
Les Cargill
Old Pif
>
> Makes Mike Judge's "Idiocracy" look like prophecy, dunnit?
>
> --
> Les Cargill
Prophecy? It is unfolding as we speak.
Stray Dog
On Wed, 10 Sep 2008, Old Pif wrote:
> Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2008 21:16:21 -0700 (PDT)
> From: Old Pif <Old...@gmail.com>
> Newsgroups: alt.computer.consultants, alt.politics.economics, sci.econ,
> soc.culture.indian, sci.research.careers
> Subject: Re: Revisiting "The Dumbest Generation"
>
The word is _plutocracy_. Landlords, the first profession, don't need to
know anything except two things: i) how to charge rent, and ii) how to
charge what the market will bear.
1297
> On Wed, 10 Sep 2008, Old Pif wrote:
>
>> Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2008 21:16:21 -0700 (PDT)
>> From: Old Pif <Old...@gmail.com>
>> Newsgroups: alt.computer.consultants, alt.politics.economics,
>> sci.econ, soc.culture.indian, sci.research.careers
>> Subject: Re: Revisiting "The Dumbest Generation"
>>
>> On Sep 10, 11:20 pm, Les Cargill <lcarg...@cfl.rr.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Makes Mike Judge's "Idiocracy" look like prophecy, dunnit?
>>>
>>> --
>>> Les Cargill
>>
>> Prophecy? It is unfolding as we speak.
> The word is _plutocracy_.
Nope.
> Landlords, the first profession,
Nope, hookers were.
> don't need to know anything except two things: i) how to
> charge rent, and ii) how to charge what the market will bear.
They do need to know what property is going to get rented.
And they don't have any real power in the modern political system anyway. They are
vastly outnumbered by those who rent and who own their property and dont need to rent.
forbi...@msn.com
> Stray Dog <sdog2...@sdf.lonestar.org> wrote:
> > Landlords, the first profession,
> they don't have any real power in the modern political system anyway. They are
> vastly outnumbered by those who rent and who own their property and dont need to rent.
To what third group do landlords belong?
I didn't know landlords were homeless,
that is neither renters nor owners.
1297
> On Sep 11, 12:42 am, "1297" <1...@npspam.com> wrote:
>> Stray Dog <sdog2...@sdf.lonestar.org> wrote:
>>> Landlords, the first profession,
>> they don't have any real power in the modern political system
>> anyway. They are
>> vastly outnumbered by those who rent and who own their property and
>> dont need to rent.
>
> To what third group do landlords belong?
They are clearly landlords.
> I didn't know landlords were homeless,
> that is neither renters nor owners.
Irrevant to whether they are plutocrats. They can't be that when they
are swamped in modern political systems by renters and owners.
PeterBP
> Pardon me, I misspelled the title. It is "Anathem." I might even be
> interested to read it.
>
I have it on my wishlist. Neal S. tends to be a good author, althugh the
Diamond Age ad Cryptonomicon were quite long-winded.
Stray Dog
On Thu, 11 Sep 2008, 1297 wrote:
> Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2008 17:42:18 +1000
> From: 1297 <12...@npspam.com>
> Newsgroups: alt.computer.consultants, alt.politics.economics, sci.econ,
> soc.culture.indian, sci.research.careers
> Subject: Re: Revisiting "The Dumbest Generation"
>
> Stray Dog <sdog...@sdf.lonestar.org> wrote:
>> On Wed, 10 Sep 2008, Old Pif wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Prophecy? It is unfolding as we speak.
>
>> The word is _plutocracy_.
>
> Nope.
Yep
>> Landlords, the first profession,
>
> Nope, hookers were.
Prostitution: the second oldest profession
spying: the third oldest.
>> don't need to know anything except two things: i) how to
>> charge rent, and ii) how to charge what the market will bear.
>
> They do need to know what property is going to get rented.
Go into deep history books. Nobody in ancient Babylon got those walled
appartments without either buying them or renting them. They also had
restaurants in ancient babylon. They had moneychangers and moneylenders.
Interest rates could be anywhere between 30% and 80%. That was found in
the clay tablets by the archeologists.
> And they don't have any real power in the modern political system anyway.
Real estate agencies, landlords, landowners, especially if they have large
holdings, are very busy with lobbying govts at all levels for tax favors,
development favors, changes in laws to favor them. In my community we have
five local papers all very very good, and they go into all the
nitty-gritty-dirty politics.
They are
> vastly outnumbered by those who rent and who own their property and dont
need to rent.
Ahhhhahahaha-- we had several big uproars in my comunity over land owners
arbitrarily upping the rents in their trailor parks since land values
multiplied here by factors of 3-5 or more in recent years.
We have a twice weekly local paper here that has one small issue and one
large issue well over 100 pages in thickness. 50 cents. Its great.
>
>
>
Antonio Huerta
> Real estate agencies, landlords, landowners, especially if they have large
> holdings, are very busy with lobbying govts at all levels for tax favors,
> development favors, changes in laws to favor them. In my community we have
> five local papers all very very good, and they go into all the
> nitty-gritty-dirty politics.
I think Straydog stopped writing to s.r.c. approximately at the time
when the housing bubble collapse stroke the US market. Withdrawal is
the usual symptom when people start to suffer. Did you suffer from
housing bubble collapse, Straydog ?
Stray Dog
On Thu, 11 Sep 2008, PeterBP wrote:
> Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2008 11:46:25 +0200
> From: PeterBP <no...@jose.com>
> Newsgroups: alt.computer.consultants, alt.politics.economics, sci.econ,
> soc.culture.indian, sci.research.careers
> Subject: Re: Revisiting "The Dumbest Generation"
>
> Stray Dog <sdog...@sdf.lonestar.org> wrote:
>
>> Pardon me, I misspelled the title. It is "Anathem." I might even be
>> interested to read it.
>>
>
> I have it on my wishlist. Neal S. tends to be a good author, althugh the
> Diamond Age ad Cryptonomicon were quite long-winded.
In my old age these days I feel I need to concentrate on non-fiction to
(try, anyway) to answer some lifelong questions of mine before I die, but
the book review made it sound so interesting. Another book said that Sir
Thomas More's "Utopia" was very popular when it came out and that it was a
major influence in pushing English society towards socialism, too. I
thought that was an interesting thought.
Out of some 170 books I've read in the last 10 years, the only one that
was fiction was a historical fiction about a woman and some men, in a
penal colony in Australia who managed to escape and steal a small ship and
get away. Can't remember the title just now, but another woman who
authored the book managed to get all the papers that were ever written and
dreamed up a story line. Most of my interest in that book derives from an
interest in how women were treated in the past and that while males
dominated society most of the time, there were actually quite a few women
in all ranks of society that were high acheivers, did many heroic things,
and in terms of cruelty towards enemies and military ability many were
fully capable of just about anything that men did. A good, easy to read
book summarizing this is "Uppity women of ancient greece and rome" by a
woman author. There was one story, elsewhere, about a women 2000 years ago
who came in high in a three horse chariot race, back when "women's lib"
was unknown. In Roman Empire days, there were a lot of women physicians
(even though physicians in those days were basically quacks) and a lot of
those were freed slaves, as judged by translations of grave markers. In
case you are interested: "Women of Ancient Greece and Rome" by Mary
Lefkowitz and Maureen Fant, two academicians.
Alas... so many books, so little time.
Stray Dog
On Thu, 11 Sep 2008, Antonio Huerta wrote:
> Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2008 06:24:42 -0700 (PDT)
> From: Antonio Huerta <ahu...@inbox.com>
> Newsgroups: alt.computer.consultants, alt.politics.economics, sci.econ,
> soc.culture.indian, sci.research.careers
> Subject: Re: Revisiting "The Dumbest Generation"
>
No, and I edited off the cross posts out of src.
I included src because of the book which had overlap with the problem that
too many people spend too much time at their keyboards (the dumbing down
of people by too much internetting).
I don't come to src very often to read anything since I can find more
people who are willing to have serious discussions about certain things
and have strong interests in those certain things.
My retirement house is paid for and my retirement resources cover all of
my expenses with a little left over.
Bye bye for another couple months.
Rod Speed
> On Thu, 11 Sep 2008, 1297 wrote:
>
>> Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2008 17:42:18 +1000
>> From: 1297 <12...@npspam.com>
>> Newsgroups: alt.computer.consultants, alt.politics.economics,
>> sci.econ, soc.culture.indian, sci.research.careers
>> Subject: Re: Revisiting "The Dumbest Generation"
>>
>> Stray Dog <sdog...@sdf.lonestar.org> wrote:
>>> On Wed, 10 Sep 2008, Old Pif wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Prophecy? It is unfolding as we speak.
>>
>>> The word is _plutocracy_.
>>
>> Nope.
>
> Yep
Nope.
>>> Landlords, the first profession,
>>
>> Nope, hookers were.
> Prostitution: the second oldest profession
Nope. Hunter/gatherers had nothing to be a landlord with, they could do prostitution fine.
Tho you can certainly make a case that prostitution is a trade, not a profession.
If you want to nit pick at that level, witchdoctors and 'healers' etc preceeded landlords
too just because that was possible with hunter/gatherers and landlords weren't.
> spying: the third oldest.
Depends entirely on how you define spying and that certainly did no preceed merchants/traders.
>>> don't need to know anything except two things: i) how to
>>> charge rent, and ii) how to charge what the market will bear.
>>
>> They do need to know what property is going to get rented.
>
> Go into deep history books. Nobody in ancient Babylon got those walled
> appartments without either buying them or renting them. They also had
> restaurants in ancient babylon. They had moneychangers and
> moneylenders. Interest rates could be anywhere between 30% and 80%.
> That was found in the clay tablets by the archeologists.
Irrelevant to that comment on your two points.
>> And they don't have any real power in the modern political system anyway.
> Real estate agencies, landlords, landowners, especially if they have
> large holdings, are very busy with lobbying govts at all levels for
> tax favors, development favors, changes in laws to favor them.
You have lumped in a hell of a lot more than your original LANDLORDS now.
Land owners are nothing like landlords.
> In my community we have five local papers all very very good, and they go into all the nitty-gritty-dirty politics.
And not one of them says that LANDLORDS have any real political power
and even if they did, they are just plain wrong, because they are grossly out
numbered by renters and home owners who have MUCH more voting power.
>> They are vastly outnumbered by those who rent and who own their property and dont need to rent.
> Ahhhhahahaha-- we had several big uproars in my comunity over land
> owners arbitrarily upping the rents in their trailor parks since land
> values multiplied here by factors of 3-5 or more in recent years.
Yes, but that is not POLITICAL POWER so isn't relevant to your original claim about it being a plutocracy.
> We have a twice weekly local paper here that has one small issue and
> one large issue well over 100 pages in thickness. 50 cents. Its great.
Irrelevant to what is being discussed, plutocracy.
1297
> On Thu, 11 Sep 2008, PeterBP wrote:
>
>> Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2008 11:46:25 +0200
>> From: PeterBP <no...@jose.com>
>> Newsgroups: alt.computer.consultants, alt.politics.economics,
>> sci.econ, soc.culture.indian, sci.research.careers
>> Subject: Re: Revisiting "The Dumbest Generation"
>>
>> Stray Dog <sdog...@sdf.lonestar.org> wrote:
>>
>>> Pardon me, I misspelled the title. It is "Anathem." I might even be
>>> interested to read it.
>>>
>>
>> I have it on my wishlist. Neal S. tends to be a good author, althugh
>> the Diamond Age ad Cryptonomicon were quite long-winded.
>
> In my old age these days I feel I need to concentrate on non-fiction
Yeah, me too. I only bother with fiction in hospital and I end up in
hospital so rarely that I didn't bother to have a pile of non fiction
that I could easily tell someone to bring to the hospital for me.
That has been fixed now if I ever get into that situation again.
> to (try, anyway) to answer some lifelong questions of mine before I
> die, but the book review made it sound so interesting. Another book
> said that Sir Thomas More's "Utopia" was very popular when it came
> out and that it was a major influence in pushing English society
> towards socialism, too. I thought that was an interesting thought.
It's more likely that society was tending in that direction and that is why
that particular book appealed to them at that time, rather than it actually
produced anything in terms of a significant change in societal attitudes.
Same with Marx and Engels. No real evidence that they produced
anything much, more that society was moving in that direction and
they were preaching to the choir on the issues they covered.
Not true of Darwin tho.
> Out of some 170 books I've read in the last 10 years, the only one
> that was fiction was a historical fiction about a woman and some men,
> in a penal colony in Australia who managed to escape and steal a
> small ship and get away. Can't remember the title just now, but
> another woman who authored the book managed to get all the papers
> that were ever written and dreamed up a story line. Most of my
> interest in that book derives from an interest in how women were
> treated in the past and that while males dominated society most of
> the time, there were actually quite a few women in all ranks of
> society that were high acheivers, did many heroic things, and in
> terms of cruelty towards enemies and military ability many were fully
> capable of just about anything that men did.
Not really, most obviously in military affairs.
The only one that had much relevance was Joan of Arc, and she
was just plain barking mad, quite literally, even heard 'the voices' etc.
Nothing anything like Vlad the Impaler or those who produced the Raj in India either.
> A good, easy to read book summarizing this is "Uppity women of ancient greece and rome" by a woman author.
What a surprise, that last. Pure propaganda.
> There was one story, elsewhere, about a women 2000 years ago who came in high in a three horse chariot race, back when
> "women's lib" was unknown. In Roman Empire days, there were a lot of
> women physicians (even though physicians in those days were basically
> quacks) and a lot of those were freed slaves, as judged by
> translations of grave markers.
And not one roman emperor, or any woman anything like that swarthy
fellow who was stupid enough to get nailed up by the romans etc either.
> In case you are interested: "Women of Ancient Greece and Rome" by Mary Lefkowitz and Maureen Fant, two academicians.
>
> Alas... so many books, so little time.
And stupid prices for so many of them too.
1297
> On Thu, 11 Sep 2008, 1297 wrote:
>
>> Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2008 17:42:18 +1000
>> From: 1297 <12...@npspam.com>
>> Newsgroups: alt.computer.consultants, alt.politics.economics,
>> sci.econ, soc.culture.indian, sci.research.careers
>> Subject: Re: Revisiting "The Dumbest Generation"
>>
>> Stray Dog <sdog...@sdf.lonestar.org> wrote:
>>> On Wed, 10 Sep 2008, Old Pif wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Prophecy? It is unfolding as we speak.
>>
>>
>> Nope.
>
> Yep
Nope.
>>> Landlords, the first profession,
>>
>> Nope, hookers were.
> Prostitution: the second oldest profession
Nope. Hunter/gatherers had nothing to be a landlord with, they could do prostitution fine.
Tho you can certainly make a case that prostitution is a trade, not a profession.
If you want to nit pick at that level, witchdoctors and 'healers' etc preceeded landlords
too just because that was possible with hunter/gatherers and landlords weren't.
> spying: the third oldest.
Depends entirely on how you define spying and that certainly did no preceed merchants/traders.
>>> don't need to know anything except two things: i) how to
>>> charge rent, and ii) how to charge what the market will bear.
>>
>> They do need to know what property is going to get rented.
>
> Go into deep history books. Nobody in ancient Babylon got those walled
> appartments without either buying them or renting them. They also had
> restaurants in ancient babylon. They had moneychangers and
> moneylenders. Interest rates could be anywhere between 30% and 80%.
> That was found in the clay tablets by the archeologists.
Irrelevant to that comment on your two points.
>> And they don't have any real power in the modern political system anyway.
> Real estate agencies, landlords, landowners, especially if they have
> large holdings, are very busy with lobbying govts at all levels for
> tax favors, development favors, changes in laws to favor them.
You have lumped in a hell of a lot more than your original LANDLORDS now.
Land owners are nothing like landlords.
> In my community we have five local papers all very very good, and they go into all the nitty-gritty-dirty politics.
And not one of them says that LANDLORDS have any real political power
and even if they did, they are just plain wrong, because they are grossly out
numbered by renters and home owners who have MUCH more voting power.
>> They are vastly outnumbered by those who rent and who own their property and dont need to rent.
> Ahhhhahahaha-- we had several big uproars in my comunity over land
> owners arbitrarily upping the rents in their trailor parks since land
> values multiplied here by factors of 3-5 or more in recent years.
Yes, but that is not POLITICAL POWER so isn't relevant to your original claim about it being a plutocracy.
> We have a twice weekly local paper here that has one small issue and
> one large issue well over 100 pages in thickness. 50 cents. Its great.
Irrelevant to what is being discussed, plutocracy.
Stray Dog
On Fri, 12 Sep 2008, 1297 wrote:
> Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2008 04:15:12 +1000
> From: 1297 <12...@npspam.com>
> Newsgroups: alt.computer.consultants, alt.politics.economics, sci.econ,
> soc.culture.indian, sci.research.careers
> Subject: Re: Revisiting "The Dumbest Generation"
>
> Stray Dog <sdog...@sdf.lonestar.org> wrote:
>> On Thu, 11 Sep 2008, PeterBP wrote:
>>
>>> I have it on my wishlist. Neal S. tends to be a good author, althugh
>>> the Diamond Age ad Cryptonomicon were quite long-winded.
>>
>> In my old age these days I feel I need to concentrate on non-fiction
>
> Yeah, me too. I only bother with fiction in hospital and I end up in
> hospital so rarely
Since my appendectomy in early 1960s, only been in once (the ER for
abdominal pains that they could not diagnose and they never came back,
long funny story about the limitations of modern medicine and insensitive
doctors, but no time now to tell you and you would laugh) about 10 years
ago.
that I didn't bother to have a pile of non fiction
> that I could easily tell someone to bring to the hospital for me.
> That has been fixed now if I ever get into that situation again.
I need to finish my wishlist to read before I die or become senile. Read
about 170 history books last ten years. Total collection: about 1000. All
from library used book sales (buck each). A bargain.
>> to (try, anyway) to answer some lifelong questions of mine before I
>> die, but the book review made it sound so interesting. Another book
>> said that Sir Thomas More's "Utopia" was very popular when it came
>> out and that it was a major influence in pushing English society
>> towards socialism, too. I thought that was an interesting thought.
>
> It's more likely that society was tending in that direction and that is why
> that particular book appealed to them at that time, rather than it actually
> produced anything in terms of a significant change in societal attitudes.
The primary impediment is that you'll never get enough people to agree on
anything. Just look at the endless arguing on the newsgroups.
> Same with Marx and Engels. No real evidence that they produced
> anything much, more that society was moving in that direction and
> they were preaching to the choir on the issues they covered.
My opinion is that we need a mixed govt. Soviet system is not the way to
go. But, unregulated capitalism will give monopolies and CEO-kings. If
they are allowed to do ANYthing they want, they will end up with 99% of
all the money and power. Just my opinion.
> Not true of Darwin tho.
>
>> Out of some 170 books I've read in the last 10 years, the only one
>> that was fiction was a historical fiction about a woman and some men,
>> in a penal colony in Australia who managed to escape and steal a
>> small ship and get away. Can't remember the title just now, but
>> another woman who authored the book managed to get all the papers
>> that were ever written and dreamed up a story line. Most of my
>> interest in that book derives from an interest in how women were
>> treated in the past and that while males dominated society most of
>> the time, there were actually quite a few women in all ranks of
>> society that were high acheivers, did many heroic things, and in
>> terms of cruelty towards enemies and military ability many were fully
>> capable of just about anything that men did.
>
> Not really, most obviously in military affairs.
>
> The only one that had much relevance was Joan of Arc, and she
> was just plain barking mad, quite literally, even heard 'the voices' etc.
You need to read: "Uppity Women", "Women Sailors and Sailor's Women" by
Cordingly, and "She Captans" by a woman, and I can list a few more you
need to read.
Amazons did exist, too. Documented, in western africa, under a black king,
2400 women in his army, all carrying muskets, and fought like hell. If you
want the refernce, just ask.
> Nothing anything like Vlad the Impaler or those who produced the Raj in India either.
>
>> A good, easy to read book summarizing this is "Uppity women of ancient greece and rome" by a woman author.
>
> What a surprise, that last. Pure propaganda.
No, confirmed in other books I read.
>> There was one story, elsewhere, about a women 2000 years ago who came in high in a three horse chariot race, back when
>> "women's lib" was unknown. In Roman Empire days, there were a lot of
>> women physicians (even though physicians in those days were basically
>> quacks) and a lot of those were freed slaves, as judged by
>> translations of grave markers.
>
> And not one roman emperor, or any woman anything like that swarthy
> fellow who was stupid enough to get nailed up by the romans etc either.
Please, read the books. Lots of tough queens, at least one Pharo in egypt,
several dowager empresses in China.
>> In case you are interested: "Women of Ancient Greece and Rome" by Mary Lefkowitz and Maureen Fant, two academicians.
>>
>> Alas... so many books, so little time.
>
> And stupid prices for so many of them too.
Go to www.booksalefinder.com and get for a buck each, almost anything.
Peter Bj/rn Perls/
Fiction is not necessarily what I *think* you are implying, which may be
blue-sky stuff. Someone I forgot said, fx. of Science Fiction that it's
point is not to predict the future, but to elaborate on the past. I find
that to be a striking observation, and quite often, in retrospect, it
seems corrcet.
>
>
> Alas... so many books, so little time.
Quite; I have 8 bookcases full of mixed fact (most of it scientific) and
fiction (most of it science fiction), and I'm compelled now to get rid
of some because I will not be able to read them in the foreseeable
future, and I prefer that someone else has good use of them; it can only
be better than gathering dust on my shelves.
Stray Dog
On Thu, 11 Sep 2008, Peter Bj/rn Perls/ wrote:
> Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2008 22:59:31 +0200
> From: Peter Bj/rn Perls/ <nu...@nada.net>
> Newsgroups: alt.computer.consultants, alt.politics.economics, sci.econ,
> soc.culture.indian, sci.research.careers
> Subject: Re: Revisiting "The Dumbest Generation"
>
> Stray Dog <sdog...@sdf.lonestar.org> wrote:
>
>> fully capable of just about anything that men did. A good, easy to read
>> book summarizing this is "Uppity women of ancient greece and rome" by a
>> woman author. There was one story, elsewhere, about a women 2000 years ago
>> who came in high in a three horse chariot race, back when "women's lib"
>> was unknown. In Roman Empire days, there were a lot of women physicians
>> (even though physicians in those days were basically quacks) and a lot of
>> those were freed slaves, as judged by translations of grave markers. In
>> case you are interested: "Women of Ancient Greece and Rome" by Mary
>> Lefkowitz and Maureen Fant, two academicians.
>
> Fiction is not necessarily what I *think* you are implying, which may be
> blue-sky stuff.
I'm not sure what you are saying here. Me, I've decided in my last days to
read about what actually happened over the last thousands of years, purely
as MY personal wish and desire to answer some of those questions I've had
all my life. Fiction is escapist, or so they say.
Someone I forgot said, fx. of Science Fiction that it's
> point is not to predict the future, but to elaborate on the past. I find
> that to be a striking observation, and quite often, in retrospect, it
> seems corrcet.
I once read a lot of sci-fi, and it was when i was young and idealistic
and optimistic and had the "faith" that science would solve all problems.
Now...I'm not so sure.
>>
>>
>> Alas... so many books, so little time.
>
> Quite; I have 8 bookcases full of mixed fact (most of it scientific) and
> fiction (most of it science fiction), and I'm compelled now to get rid
> of some because I will not be able to read them in the foreseeable
> future, and I prefer that someone else has good use of them; it can only
> be better than gathering dust on my shelves.
The answer is to use _triage_ to sort out.
You can donate to --usually-- those local libraries which have FOTLs
(Friends of the library) who organize fund raising for the library by
collecting donated books and selling them, usuallyfor a buck a piece.
P.S. I normally don't post on src anymore, usually hang out on a.c.c
(David P.)
>
> I read a lot of sci-fi when i was young & idealistic
> and optimistic and had the "faith" that science
> would solve all problems. Now...I'm not so sure.
It's not fair to future generations to have to live in
more crowded conditions, and to have to fight
over food, fuel, clean air & water & everything else.
We need population control. Stopping the
suppression of influenza would be a good
place to start.
.
.
--
1297
> On Fri, 12 Sep 2008, 1297 wrote:
>
>> Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2008 04:15:12 +1000
>> From: 1297 <12...@npspam.com>
>> Newsgroups: alt.computer.consultants, alt.politics.economics,
>> sci.econ, soc.culture.indian, sci.research.careers
>> Subject: Re: Revisiting "The Dumbest Generation"
>>
>> Stray Dog <sdog...@sdf.lonestar.org> wrote:
>>> On Thu, 11 Sep 2008, PeterBP wrote:
>>>
>
>
>>>> I have it on my wishlist. Neal S. tends to be a good author,
>>>> althugh the Diamond Age ad Cryptonomicon were quite long-winded.
>>>
>>> In my old age these days I feel I need to concentrate on non-fiction
>>
>> Yeah, me too. I only bother with fiction in hospital and I end up in
>> hospital so rarely
>
> Since my appendectomy in early 1960s, only been in once (the ER for
> abdominal pains that they could not diagnose and they never came back,
> long funny story about the limitations of modern medicine and
> insensitive doctors, but no time now to tell you and you would laugh)
> about 10 years ago.
I'm currently averaging once in 20 years and thats only been twice since childhood.
I had the same problem with the ER too, they were too
stupid to work out that the problem was just gallstones.
> that I didn't bother to have a pile of non fiction
>> that I could easily tell someone to bring to the hospital for me.
>> That has been fixed now if I ever get into that situation again.
> I need to finish my wishlist to read before I die or become senile. Read about 170 history books last ten years. Total
> collection: about 1000.
I havent bothered to count mine and have been too lazy to keep the database up to date.
Likely its quite a bit more than both of those.
> All from library used book sales (buck each). A bargain.
I get mine from a variety of sources, including that one and even yard sales.
I do buy quite a few new too.
Just wish google would put a bomb under that copyright system so
I could read them as ebooks instead. I'd be quite happy to pay a
buck each to the author and wouldn't have to take pot luck with
the used books.
>>> to (try, anyway) to answer some lifelong questions of mine before I
>>> die, but the book review made it sound so interesting. Another book
>>> said that Sir Thomas More's "Utopia" was very popular when it came
>>> out and that it was a major influence in pushing English society
>>> towards socialism, too. I thought that was an interesting thought.
>> It's more likely that society was tending in that direction and that is why that particular book appealed to them at
>> that time, rather than it actually produced anything in terms of a significant change in societal attitudes.
> The primary impediment is that you'll never get enough people to
> agree on anything. Just look at the endless arguing on the newsgroups.
Sure, but you don't need to when a few gung ho individuals like Lenin and
Mao and Cromwell etc are prepared to turn the current world on its head.
Google and Gates and Wikipedia in spades.
>> Same with Marx and Engels. No real evidence that they produced
>> anything much, more that society was moving in that direction and
>> they were preaching to the choir on the issues they covered.
> My opinion is that we need a mixed govt.
Every modern first world govt is mixed. Even the US has large swags
of socialism, most obviously with public education and medical facilities,
let alone social security and Medicare/Medicade etc.
> Soviet system is not the way to go. But, unregulated capitalism
No modern first world country has ever had that.
> will give monopolies and CEO-kings. If they are allowed to do ANYthing they want, they will end up with 99% of all the
> money and power.
And that is the main reason the US went for its antitrust laws.
> Just my opinion.
Its not opinion, its fact.
>> Not true of Darwin tho.
>>> Out of some 170 books I've read in the last 10 years, the only one
>>> that was fiction was a historical fiction about a woman and some men, in a penal colony in Australia who managed to
>>> escape and steal a
>>> small ship and get away. Can't remember the title just now, but
>>> another woman who authored the book managed to get all the papers
>>> that were ever written and dreamed up a story line. Most of my
>>> interest in that book derives from an interest in how women were
>>> treated in the past and that while males dominated society most of
>>> the time, there were actually quite a few women in all ranks of
>>> society that were high acheivers, did many heroic things, and in
>>> terms of cruelty towards enemies and military ability many were
>>> fully capable of just about anything that men did.
>> Not really, most obviously in military affairs.
>> The only one that had much relevance was Joan of Arc, and she was just plain barking mad, quite literally, even heard
>> 'the voices' etc.
> You need to read: "Uppity Women", "Women Sailors and Sailor's Women" by Cordingly, and "She Captans" by a woman, and I
> can list a few more you need to read.
Read them all thanks. And realise they radically overstate what actually happened.
> Amazons did exist, too. Documented, in western africa, under a black king, 2400 women in his army, all carrying
> muskets, and fought like hell. If you want the refernce, just ask.
And the Romans just raped Boudica.
>> Nothing anything like Vlad the Impaler or those who produced the Raj in India either.
>>> A good, easy to read book summarizing this is "Uppity women of ancient greece and rome" by a woman author.
>> What a surprise, that last. Pure propaganda.
> No, confirmed in other books I read.
I didn't say she lied, she just radically overstates reality.
There might just a reason why there isn't any female Galen.
>>> There was one story, elsewhere, about a women 2000 years ago who
>>> came in high in a three horse chariot race, back when "women's lib"
>>> was unknown. In Roman Empire days, there were a lot of women physicians (even though physicians in those days were
>>> basically quacks) and a lot of those were freed slaves, as judged by
>>> translations of grave markers.
>> And not one roman emperor, or any woman anything like that swarthy
>> fellow who was stupid enough to get nailed up by the romans etc either.
> Please, read the books.
Read them thanks. Likely well before you did too since I have been doing that for half a century now.
> Lots of tough queens, at least one Pharo in egypt, several dowager empresses in China.
None of which amounted to all that much.
>>> In case you are interested: "Women of Ancient Greece and Rome" by Mary Lefkowitz and Maureen Fant, two academicians.
>>> Alas... so many books, so little time.
>> And stupid prices for so many of them too.
> Go to www.booksalefinder.com and get for a buck each, almost anything.
Not the currently new books they dont have.
Wanderer
Old Pif
>
> > Stopping the suppression of influenza would be a good
> > place to start.
>
> Or we could start more and bloodier wars.
>
Or preventive bombardments of densely populated quarters, with 5
minutes warning to give equal chance.
Stray Dog
On Fri, 12 Sep 2008, 1297 wrote:
> Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2008 09:22:33 +1000
> From: 1297 <12...@npspam.com>
> Newsgroups: alt.computer.consultants, alt.politics.economics, sci.econ,
> soc.culture.indian, sci.research.careers
> Subject: Re: Revisiting "The Dumbest Generation"
>
> Stray Dog <sdog...@sdf.lonestar.org> wrote:
>> On Fri, 12 Sep 2008, 1297 wrote:
>>
>>> Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2008 04:15:12 +1000
>>> From: 1297 <12...@npspam.com>
>>> Newsgroups: alt.computer.consultants, alt.politics.economics,
>>> sci.econ, soc.culture.indian, sci.research.careers
>>> Subject: Re: Revisiting "The Dumbest Generation"
>>>
>>> Stray Dog <sdog...@sdf.lonestar.org> wrote:
>>>> On Thu, 11 Sep 2008, PeterBP wrote:
>>>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Yeah, me too. I only bother with fiction in hospital and I end up in
>>> hospital so rarely
>>
>> Since my appendectomy in early 1960s, only been in once (the ER for
>> abdominal pains that they could not diagnose and they never came back,
>> long funny story about the limitations of modern medicine and
>> insensitive doctors, but no time now to tell you and you would laugh)
>> about 10 years ago.
>
> I'm currently averaging once in 20 years and thats only been twice since childhood.
>
> I had the same problem with the ER too, they were too
> stupid to work out that the problem was just gallstones.
Doctors love to do tests, charge you or the insurance company, to go on
fishing expeditions.
I had a variety of other minor problems, all went into remission before
any diagnosis but never ending tests that came up negative.
>> that I didn't bother to have a pile of non fiction
>>> that I could easily tell someone to bring to the hospital for me.
>>> That has been fixed now if I ever get into that situation again.
>
>> I need to finish my wishlist to read before I die or become senile. Read about 170 history books last ten years. Total
>> collection: about 1000.
>
> I havent bothered to count mine and have been too lazy to keep the database up to date.
>
> Likely its quite a bit more than both of those.
I have a database of "read" books, and "interesting" books. The rest are
on the shelves.
>> All from library used book sales (buck each). A bargain.
>
> I get mine from a variety of sources, including that one and even yard sales.
> I do buy quite a few new too.
>
> Just wish google would put a bomb under that copyright system so
> I could read them as ebooks instead. I'd be quite happy to pay a
> buck each to the author and wouldn't have to take pot luck with
> the used books.
Get a Kindle? But, then, I'd rather just have a real book in my hands.
I mark mine up with notes all the time, check marks, etc.
>>> that time, rather than it actually produced anything in terms of a significant change in societal attitudes.
>
>> The primary impediment is that you'll never get enough people to
>> agree on anything. Just look at the endless arguing on the newsgroups.
>
> Sure, but you don't need to when a few gung ho individuals like Lenin and
> Mao and Cromwell etc are prepared to turn the current world on its head.
Of course you are totally forgetting that all of the stupid sheep "fall
for" their crap and do anything these guys say.
> Google and Gates and Wikipedia in spades.
>
>>> Same with Marx and Engels. No real evidence that they produced
>>> anything much, more that society was moving in that direction and
>>> they were preaching to the choir on the issues they covered.
>
>> My opinion is that we need a mixed govt.
>
> Every modern first world govt is mixed. Even the US has large swags
> of socialism, most obviously with public education and medical facilities,
> let alone social security and Medicare/Medicade etc.
Not much socialism in Japan.
>> Soviet system is not the way to go. But, unregulated capitalism
>
> No modern first world country has ever had that.
Read the history of England. I'm on my 5-6th book on England. Lots of
unregulated capitalism until recent times.
>> will give monopolies and CEO-kings. If they are allowed to do ANYthing they want, they will end up with 99% of all the
>> money and power.
>
> And that is the main reason the US went for its antitrust laws.
Which are nice but they don't work that well.
>> Just my opinion.
>
> Its not opinion, its fact.
No, it is my opinion. Just like YOU have your opinions.
>>> Not true of Darwin tho.
>
>>>> Out of some 170 books I've read in the last 10 years, the only one
>>>> that was fiction was a historical fiction about a woman and some men, in a penal colony in Australia who managed to
>>>> escape and steal a
>>>> small ship and get away. Can't remember the title just now, but
>>>> another woman who authored the book managed to get all the papers
>>>> that were ever written and dreamed up a story line. Most of my
>>>> interest in that book derives from an interest in how women were
>>>> treated in the past and that while males dominated society most of
>>>> the time, there were actually quite a few women in all ranks of
>>>> society that were high acheivers, did many heroic things, and in
>>>> terms of cruelty towards enemies and military ability many were
>>>> fully capable of just about anything that men did.
>
>>> Not really, most obviously in military affairs.
>
>>> The only one that had much relevance was Joan of Arc, and she was just plain barking mad, quite literally, even heard
>>> 'the voices' etc.
>
>> You need to read: "Uppity Women", "Women Sailors and Sailor's Women" by Cordingly, and "She Captans" by a woman, and I
>> can list a few more you need to read.
>
> Read them all thanks.
Did you, really? You had me fooled.
> And realise they radically overstate what actually happened.
Your opinion.
>> Amazons did exist, too. Documented, in western africa, under a black king, 2400 women in his army, all carrying
>> muskets, and fought like hell. If you want the refernce, just ask.
>
> And the Romans just raped Boudica.
There was a lot of that, too.
>>> Nothing anything like Vlad the Impaler or those who produced the Raj in India either.
>
>>>> A good, easy to read book summarizing this is "Uppity women of ancient greece and rome" by a woman author.
>
>>> What a surprise, that last. Pure propaganda.
>
>> No, confirmed in other books I read.
>
> I didn't say she lied, she just radically overstates reality.
You said "pure propaganda" which means you said it was a lie.
> There might just a reason why there isn't any female Galen.
>
>>>> There was one story, elsewhere, about a women 2000 years ago who
>>>> came in high in a three horse chariot race, back when "women's lib"
>>>> was unknown. In Roman Empire days, there were a lot of women physicians (even though physicians in those days were
>>>> basically quacks) and a lot of those were freed slaves, as judged by
>>>> translations of grave markers.
>
>>> And not one roman emperor, or any woman anything like that swarthy
>>> fellow who was stupid enough to get nailed up by the romans etc either.
>
>> Please, read the books.
>
> Read them thanks. Likely well before you did too since I have been
> doing that for half a century now.
I'm older than you.
>> Lots of tough queens, at least one Pharo in egypt, several dowager empresses in China.
>
> None of which amounted to all that much.
They get prominent space in a lot of history books. Or, are you sexist?
>>>> In case you are interested: "Women of Ancient Greece and Rome" by Mary Lefkowitz and Maureen Fant, two academicians.
>
>>>> Alas... so many books, so little time.
>
>>> And stupid prices for so many of them too.
>
>> Go to www.booksalefinder.com and get for a buck each, almost anything.
>
> Not the currently new books they dont have.
Go to Amazon, Alibris, ABE (and many others) for discounts on the new
books. Or, wait 1-2 years. All the prices go down with time.
(David P.)
It's more equitable to stop the suppression of
influenza. Then EVERYONE would be on the
front lines, instead of just a few soldiers!
.
.
--
1297
The only test they did was to see what effect anginine had to rule out a heart attack.
> charge you or the insurance company,
It was completely free and did not involve any charge to any
insurance company because my country had enough of a clue
to have a decent health care funding system decades ago.
The most recent 2 week stay in hospital was completely free
too, I didn't even have to pay for the TV and that involved a
trip in a King Air air ambulance too, also completely free.
> to go on fishing expeditions.
These doctors aren't interested in fishing.
> I had a variety of other minor problems, all went into remission
> before any diagnosis but never ending tests that came up negative.
I did eventually get the GP order an ultrasound which did accurately
diagnose the gallstones. Pity it took 3 recurrences of the gallstones
before that was ordered. It should have happened in the first place
with 20/20 hindsight.
>>> that I didn't bother to have a pile of non fiction
>>>> that I could easily tell someone to bring to the hospital for me.
>>>> That has been fixed now if I ever get into that situation again.
>>
>>> I need to finish my wishlist to read before I die or become senile.
>>> Read about 170 history books last ten years. Total collection:
>>> about 1000.
>>
>> I havent bothered to count mine and have been too lazy to keep the
>> database up to date. Likely its quite a bit more than both of those.
>
> I have a database of "read" books, and "interesting" books.
Yeah, I do too, just been too slack about keeping it up to date.
> The rest are on the shelves.
I long since ran out of shelf space and most of them are in immense piles all over the house.
>>> All from library used book sales (buck each). A bargain.
>>
>> I get mine from a variety of sources, including that one and even
>> yard sales. I do buy quite a few new too.
>>
>> Just wish google would put a bomb under that copyright system so
>> I could read them as ebooks instead. I'd be quite happy to pay a
>> buck each to the author and wouldn't have to take pot luck with
>> the used books.
> Get a Kindle?
Those are nothing like a buck a book.
> But, then, I'd rather just have a real book in my hands.
> I mark mine up with notes all the time, check marks, etc.
I don't.
>>>> that time, rather than it actually produced anything in terms of a
>>>> significant change in societal attitudes.
>>
>>> The primary impediment is that you'll never get enough people to
>>> agree on anything. Just look at the endless arguing on the newsgroups.
>>
>> Sure, but you don't need to when a few gung ho individuals like Lenin and Mao and Cromwell etc are prepared to turn
>> the current world on its head.
> Of course you are totally forgetting that all of the stupid sheep
> "fall for" their crap and do anything these guys say.
Nope, that is essentially what I said in different words.
>> Google and Gates and Wikipedia in spades.
>>
>>>> Same with Marx and Engels. No real evidence that they produced
>>>> anything much, more that society was moving in that direction and
>>>> they were preaching to the choir on the issues they covered.
>>
>>> My opinion is that we need a mixed govt.
>>
>> Every modern first world govt is mixed. Even the US has large swags
>> of socialism, most obviously with public education and medical
>> facilities, let alone social security and Medicare/Medicade etc.
> Not much socialism in Japan.
Wrong. Their education system is just as socialised as anywhere
else in the modern first world, more so than in america in fact.
Their hospital/medical system in spades.
Their pension system in spades.
>>> Soviet system is not the way to go. But, unregulated capitalism
>>
>> No modern first world country has ever had that.
> Read the history of England.
Did that half a century ago thanks.
> I'm on my 5-6th book on England.
I'd have read more like 50, likely even more than 100.
> Lots of unregulated capitalism until recent times.
That is just plain wrong. There has been regulation of
all aspects of capitalism there for hundreds of years now.
Their consumer protection laws are quite a bit more gung ho than america.
They have much more stringent controls on company takeovers
than america has and have had that for a hell of a long time now.
They had controls over what the East India Company could do hundreds of years ago.
They had controls over what capitalism could do when america was being colonised.
>>> will give monopolies and CEO-kings. If they are allowed to do
>>> ANYthing they want, they will end up with 99% of all the money and
>>> power.
>> And that is the main reason the US went for its antitrust laws.
>
> Which are nice but they don't work that well.
They had one hell of an effect on the robber barons.
>>> Just my opinion.
>>
>> Its not opinion, its fact.
> No, it is my opinion. Just like YOU have your opinions.
That is a fact, its not just an opinion.
>>>> Not true of Darwin tho.
>>
>>>>> Out of some 170 books I've read in the last 10 years, the only one
>>>>> that was fiction was a historical fiction about a woman and some
>>>>> men, in a penal colony in Australia who managed to escape and
>>>>> steal a small ship and get away. Can't remember the title just now, but
>>>>> another woman who authored the book managed to get all the papers
>>>>> that were ever written and dreamed up a story line. Most of my
>>>>> interest in that book derives from an interest in how women were
>>>>> treated in the past and that while males dominated society most of
>>>>> the time, there were actually quite a few women in all ranks of
>>>>> society that were high acheivers, did many heroic things, and in
>>>>> terms of cruelty towards enemies and military ability many were
>>>>> fully capable of just about anything that men did.
>>
>>>> Not really, most obviously in military affairs.
>>
>>>> The only one that had much relevance was Joan of Arc, and she was
>>>> just plain barking mad, quite literally, even heard 'the voices'
>>>> etc.
>>
>>> You need to read: "Uppity Women", "Women Sailors and Sailor's
>>> Women" by Cordingly, and "She Captans" by a woman, and I can list a
>>> few more you need to read.
>>
>> Read them all thanks.
>
> Did you, really?
Yep.
> You had me fooled.
Some are easily fooled.
>> And realise they radically overstate what actually happened.
> Your opinion.
Nope, another fact.
>>> Amazons did exist, too. Documented, in western africa, under a
>>> black king, 2400 women in his army, all carrying muskets, and
>>> fought like hell. If you want the refernce, just ask.
>>
>> And the Romans just raped Boudica.
>
> There was a lot of that, too.
>
>>>> Nothing anything like Vlad the Impaler or those who produced the
>>>> Raj in India either.
>>
>>>>> A good, easy to read book summarizing this is "Uppity women of
>>>>> ancient greece and rome" by a woman author.
>>
>>>> What a surprise, that last. Pure propaganda.
>>
>>> No, confirmed in other books I read.
>>
>> I didn't say she lied, she just radically overstates reality.
> You said "pure propaganda" which means you said it was a lie.
Nope, propaganda isn't a lie, its just a biased point of view
http://onelook.com/?w=propaganda&ls=a
>> There might just a reason why there isn't any female Galen.
>>
>>>>> There was one story, elsewhere, about a women 2000 years ago who
>>>>> came in high in a three horse chariot race, back when "women's
>>>>> lib" was unknown. In Roman Empire days, there were a lot of women
>>>>> physicians (even though physicians in those days were basically
>>>>> quacks) and a lot of those were freed slaves, as judged by translations of grave markers.
>>
>>>> And not one roman emperor, or any woman anything like that swarthy
>>>> fellow who was stupid enough to get nailed up by the romans etc
>>>> either.
>>
>>> Please, read the books.
>>
>> Read them thanks. Likely well before you did too since I have been
>> doing that for half a century now.
>
> I'm older than you.
No you aren't.
>>> Lots of tough queens, at least one Pharo in egypt, several dowager
>>> empresses in China.
>>
>> None of which amounted to all that much.
>
> They get prominent space in a lot of history books.
That doesn't mean that they actually did that much.
> Or, are you sexist?
Nope, you are.
>>>>> In case you are interested: "Women of Ancient Greece and Rome" by
>>>>> Mary Lefkowitz and Maureen Fant, two academicians.
>>
>>>>> Alas... so many books, so little time.
>>
>>>> And stupid prices for so many of them too.
>>
>>> Go to www.booksalefinder.com and get for a buck each, almost
>>> anything.
>>
>> Not the currently new books they dont have.
>
> Go to Amazon, Alibris, ABE (and many others) for discounts on the new books.
You seriously 'think' that I don't know about those ?
Nothing like a buck a book.
> Or, wait 1-2 years. All the prices go down with time.
And only complete duds only cost a buck a book in that time.
Rod Speed
Nope, its only a small subset of the population that gets killed by influenza.
(David P.)
> (David P.) <imb...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
> > It's more equitable to stop the suppression of
> > influenza. Then EVERYONE would be on the
> > front lines, instead of just a few soldiers!
>
> gets killed by influenza.
If it were a large subset, it wouldn't be
a good proposal!
.
.
--
Rod Speed
> Rod Speed <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote
>> (David Pee) <imb...@mindspring.com> wrote
>>> It's more equitable to stop the suppression of
>>> influenza. Then EVERYONE would be on the
>>> front lines, instead of just a few soldiers!
>> its only a small subset of the population that gets killed by influenza.
> If it were a large subset, it wouldn't be a good proposal!
That was a comment on your terminally silly EVERYONE claim.
The vast bulk of the population is NOT at risk of getting killed by influenza.
(David P.)
> (David Pee) <imb...@mindspring.com> wrote
>
> > Rod Speed <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote
> >> (David Pee) <imb...@mindspring.com> wrote
> >>> It's more equitable to stop the suppression of
> >>> influenza. Then EVERYONE would be on the
> >>> front lines, instead of just a few soldiers!
> > If it were a large subset, it wouldn't be a good proposal!
>
The vast bulk of the armies will NOT be killed in action!
EVERYONE is at risk to contract influenza, throughout
their lives, and NOONE knows exactly WHO will die,
WHEN, so EVERYONE is on the front lines!
.
.
--
Rod Speed
> Rod Speed <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote
>> (David Pee) <imb...@mindspring.com> wrote
>>> Rod Speed <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote
>>>> (David Pee) <imb...@mindspring.com> wrote
>>>>> It's more equitable to stop the suppression of
>>>>> influenza. Then EVERYONE would be on the
>>>>> front lines, instead of just a few soldiers!
>>>> its only a small subset that gets killed by influenza.
>>> If it were a large subset, it wouldn't be a good proposal!
>> The vast bulk of the population will NOT be killed by influenza.
> The vast bulk of the armies will NOT be killed in action!
> EVERYONE is at risk to contract influenza, throughout their lives,
But fuck all of those are at risk of dying from it.
> and NOONE knows exactly WHO will die,
Wrong, as always.
> WHEN, so EVERYONE is on the front lines!
You wouldnt know what a real front line was if one bit you on your lard arse, child.
(David P.)
>
The big picture is NOT "JUST US, RIGHT NOW"!!
> > and NOONE knows exactly WHO will die,
> > WHEN, so EVERYONE is on the front lines!
.
.
--
Peter Bj/rn Perls/
Judging from politics of today, that'll come all in its own course.
Peter Bj/rn Perls/
Old Pif
> Old Pif <Old...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Sep 11, 9:09 pm, Wanderer <n...@there.yet> wrote:
>
> > > > Stopping the suppression of influenza would be a good
> > > > place to start.
>
> > > Or we could start more and bloodier wars.
>
> > Or preventive bombardments of densely populated quarters, with 5
> > minutes warning to give equal chance.
>
> New Socialism?
>
Regulated society, Chinese stile.
Peter Bj/rn Perls/
> On Sep 13, 6:24 am, n...@nada.net (Peter Bj/rn Perls/) wrote:
> > Old Pif <Old...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On Sep 11, 9:09 pm, Wanderer <n...@there.yet> wrote:
> >
> > > > > Stopping the suppression of influenza would be a good
> > > > > place to start.
> >
> > > > Or we could start more and bloodier wars.
> >
> > > Or preventive bombardments of densely populated quarters, with 5
> > > minutes warning to give equal chance.
> >
> > New Socialism?
> >
>
> Regulated society, Chinese stile.
Ergo Totalitarian Capitalism?
Stray Dog
On Sat, 13 Sep 2008, Peter Bj/rn Perls/ wrote:
> Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2008 12:24:47 +0200
> From: Peter Bj/rn Perls/ <nu...@nada.net>
> Newsgroups: alt.computer.consultants, alt.politics.economics, sci.econ,
> soc.culture.indian, sci.research.careers
> Subject: Re: Revisiting "The Dumbest Generation"
>
> Wanderer <n...@there.yet> wrote:
>
>> (David P.) <imb...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Stray Dog <sdog2...@sdf.lonestar.org> wrote:
>>>> I read a lot of sci-fi when i was young & idealistic
>>>> and optimistic and had the "faith" that science
>>>> would solve all problems. Now...I'm not so sure.
>>>
>>> It's not fair to future generations to have to live in
>>> more crowded conditions, and to have to fight
>>> over food, fuel, clean air & water & everything else.
>>> We need population control. Stopping the
>>> suppression of influenza would be a good
>>> place to start.
>>
>> Or we could start more and bloodier wars.
>
> Judging from politics of today, that'll come all in its own course.
Judging by what both McCain and Palin have been reported to be saying just
the last 2 days about Georgia/Ossetia/Abkhazan, we're very definitely
headed back into the Cold War, and there are one hell of a lot of MIRVed
missles left and lots of nuke subs with MIRVed warheads.
Then, we really don't know how many "missing" nuke ordanance inventory is
just misplaced or really in the hands of 3rd parties, either.
zzbunker
> On Sep 10, 6:44 pm, Stray Dog <sdog2...@sdf.lonestar.org> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > Many books, articles, etc., have come out in recent years that discussed
> > the decline in knowledge and skills among our younger generation.
>
> > Here is a book review out of tuesday's WSJ, Sept 9, 2008, page A23:
>
> > title: "Internet-Free And glad of It"
>
> > The review is by Paul Boutin
>
> > the book is "Anatem" (a novel) by Neal Stephenson
>
> > Here is a quote of the first paragraph:
>
> > "Is Google making us stupid? Intellectuals fret that the internet's
> > instant-answer machine may be making us dumber, as we learn to solve
> > problems without applying long-term mental effort. 'I'm not thinking the
> > way I used to think', worried technology pundit Nicholas Carr in a recent
> > Atlantic Monthly article. After 10 years of Internet immersion, Mr. Carr
> > finds that when he attempts to read a book his concentration wanes after
> > three pages. "
>
> end, all accumulated knowledge is depositing into giant distributed
> database which is called Internet. And because all (substantial)
> problems have been already solved people just need to learn how to get
> what they need from the database. Apparently using Google.
>
> Intellectual skills are gradually devaluating. Another traits take
> their place. Sex appeal, wit ... all that stuff.- Hide quoted text -
Well, all of the that is simple to understand why, since just about
all
of the crank US multinationals, and particurly the moronic US media
ALWAYS
vote as a block for reduced spending on everything except for
commercial TV.
So there's mothing science, math, engineering, or medicine, or law,
or any type of education can about do it, since the tards, as
usual,
want for max GM profits and nothing else.
So most of the better scientists long along balied out to doing
nothing but Game Theory.
And most of the better engineers long along left to do robots,
expert systems, Holograms,,
RISC Computers,, parallel processors, fiber optics,.PV Cells,
Ebooks, Blogs, On-Line-Publishing,
Optical Computers,, HTML. XML, USB, GPS, AAVs, AUVs, cruise
missiles, and
biodiesel.
Since these people are mentally-deranged idiots never before seen
in history.
>
> - Show quoted text -
dog bomber
> On Sat, 13 Sep 2008, Peter Bj/rn Perls/ wrote:
>
>> Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2008 12:24:47 +0200
>> From: Peter Bj/rn Perls/ <nu...@nada.net>
>> Newsgroups: alt.computer.consultants, alt.politics.economics,
>> sci.econ, soc.culture.indian, sci.research.careers
>> Subject: Re: Revisiting "The Dumbest Generation"
>>
>> Wanderer <n...@there.yet> wrote:
>>
>>> (David P.) <imb...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Stray Dog <sdog2...@sdf.lonestar.org> wrote:
>>>>> I read a lot of sci-fi when i was young & idealistic
>>>>> and optimistic and had the "faith" that science
>>>>> would solve all problems. Now...I'm not so sure.
>>>>
>>>> It's not fair to future generations to have to live in
>>>> more crowded conditions, and to have to fight
>>>> over food, fuel, clean air & water & everything else.
>>>> We need population control. Stopping the
>>>> suppression of influenza would be a good
>>>> place to start.
>>>
>>> Or we could start more and bloodier wars.
>>
>> Judging from politics of today, that'll come all in its own course.
>
> Judging by what both McCain and Palin have been reported to be saying
> just the last 2 days about Georgia/Ossetia/Abkhazan, we're very
> definitely headed back into the Cold War,
Obviously depends on whether McCain gets elected.
The bimbo wont get any say what so ever unless the geriatric carks it.
> and there are one hell of a lot of MIRVed missles left and lots of nuke subs with MIRVed warheads.
How odd that not one of those last got used the during the real cold war.
> Then, we really don't know how many "missing" nuke ordanance
> inventory is just misplaced or really in the hands of 3rd parties, either.
They might just have used it already if they had it.
(David P.)
> Wanderer <n...@there.yet> wrote:
> > (David P.) <imb...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
> > > It's not fair to future generations to have to live in
> > > more crowded conditions, and to have to fight
> > > over food, fuel, clean air & water & everything else.
> > > We need population control. Stopping the
> > > suppression of influenza would be a good
> > > place to start.
>
> > Or we could start more and bloodier wars.
>
> Judging from politics of today, that'll come
> all in its own course.
We won't have world peace until the causes of
the fighting are resolved, with the Golden Rule!
.
.
--
ro...@telus.net
<sdog...@sdf.lonestar.org> wrote:
>Landlords, the first profession,
Farmer must have preceded landlord, as there was no private ownership
of land before agriculture.
-- Roy L
zzbu...@netscape.net
> > the decline in knowledge and skills among our younger generation.
>
> > Here is a book review out of tuesday's WSJ, Sept 9, 2008, page A23:
>
> > title: "Internet-Free And glad of It"
>
> > The review is by Paul Boutin
>
> > the book is "Anatem" (a novel) by Neal Stephenson
>
> > Here is a quote of the first paragraph:
>
> > "Is Google making us stupid? Intellectuals fret that the internet's
> > instant-answer machine may be making us dumber, as we learn to solve
> > problems without applying long-term mental effort. 'I'm not thinking the
> > way I used to think', worried technology pundit Nicholas Carr in a recent
> > Atlantic Monthly article. After 10 years of Internet immersion, Mr. Carr
> > finds that when he attempts to read a book his concentration wanes after
> > three pages. "
>
>
> > Reminded me of Sir Thomas More's "Utopia" (of some 500 years ago).
>
> The pocket calculator did the same thing; people lose their mathematical
> faculties because they lean on their TI's. Hom many people here have a
> clear notion of now to multiply fx. 23x45 in their heads without use of
> paper and pen?
Probably not many. since that's why wrist-watch computers, E-Books,
fiber optics,
CD, MP3, DVD+rw. PV Cells, Optical Computers, and USB were
invented.
Since that does away with the idiot paper, pen, and also the idiot
TI problem at the same thing.
>
> --
> - Peter ***http://titancity.com/
> "Don't go around saying the world owes you a living. The world owes
> you nothing. It was here first." - Mark Twain- Hide quoted text -
marika
"Stray Dog" <sdog...@sdf.lonestar.org> wrote in message
news:Pine.NEB.4.64.08...@sdf.lonestar.org...
>>
> Judging by what both McCain and Palin have been reported to be saying just
> the last 2 days about Georgia/Ossetia/Abkhazan, we're very definitely
> headed back into the Cold War, and there are one hell of a lot of MIRVed
> missles left and lots of nuke subs with MIRVed warheads.
>
> Then, we really don't know how many "missing" nuke ordanance inventory is
> just misplaced or really in the hands of 3rd parties, either.
>
Fortunately the cold war got scotched by the economic disaster. Russia had
to close it's stock market down the other day because of the disastrous 58
percent loss. You can blame the US economy. But you'd be at least somewhat
wrong. The loss is at least in part attributable to low demand on oil.
The price on that was artificially raised by speculators. But now, it's
down again, and lower demand is expected to force Russian oil down to forty
dollars a barrel. The second reason: no one cares whether Georgia or
Russia started it. They only care if their investments are sound. No one
wants to do business with a volatile Russia. Putin the lunatic just chewed
out Tymoshenko today. They are getting themselves into more and more
trouble and blaming the US more and more but they just don't have a clue
what they are doing
mk5000
"ne dis pas à ton père
qu'il porte des oeilleres
hey, your old man should know
if you see a shadow, there's something there"--"Une Annee Sans Lumiere",
Arcade Fire
Stray Dog
On Fri, 3 Oct 2008, marika wrote:
> Date: Fri, 3 Oct 2008 20:39:10 -0400
> From: marika <marik...@gmail.com>
> Newsgroups: alt.computer.consultants, alt.politics.economics, sci.econ,
> soc.culture.indian, sci.research.careers,
> alt.usenet.legends.lester-mosley
> Subject: Re: Revisiting "The Dumbest Generation"
>
>
> "Stray Dog" <sdog...@sdf.lonestar.org> wrote in message
> news:Pine.NEB.4.64.08...@sdf.lonestar.org...
>>>
>> Judging by what both McCain and Palin have been reported to be saying just
>> the last 2 days about Georgia/Ossetia/Abkhazan, we're very definitely
>> headed back into the Cold War, and there are one hell of a lot of MIRVed
>> missles left and lots of nuke subs with MIRVed warheads.
>>
>> Then, we really don't know how many "missing" nuke ordanance inventory is
>> just misplaced or really in the hands of 3rd parties, either.
>>
>
>
> Fortunately the cold war got scotched by the economic disaster.
Since the end of the cold war, the US defense budget (not counting the DOE
budget which includes nuclear bomb upgrades, etc), has never gone down.
based on that fact, I'd hardly think that the cold war was ever scotched.
Russia had
> to close it's stock market down the other day because of the disastrous 58
> percent loss.
At the same time Russian military ships are visiting Venezuela, like it or
not (not to mention that Russian long range patrols have re-started), and
they have $100 bil trade surplus.
> You can blame the US economy.
That is a separate subject. I'd rather blame the oil/commodity speculators
and the greedy-selfish scumbags that promoted the housing bubble.
But you'd be at least somewhat
> wrong. The loss is at least in part attributable to low demand on oil. The
> price on that was artificially raised by speculators.
Yes.
But now, it's down
> again, and lower demand is expected to force Russian oil down to forty
> dollars a barrel.
I doubt it.
The second reason: no one cares whether Georgia or Russia
> started it.
Everyone in the White House _says_ Russia is the badguy, but the
nitty-gritty is more complicated. S. Ossetia & Abkazhan didn't like their
own govt and the polls said those people were 90% against their own govt
(the Georgian) and if they had their way, they'd rather be part of Russia
than Georgia.
> They only care if their investments are sound. No one wants to
> do business with a volatile Russia.
On the contrary, Europe gets 1/3 of its energy from Russia, like it or
not.
> Putin the lunatic just chewed out
> Tymoshenko today.
Yulia is a very pretty woman. Some reports say she is competant, too.
Probably at least as competant as GWB. Maybe more.
They are getting themselves into more and more trouble and
> blaming the US more and more
Might be right, after all, we (the US) are in Iraq (and losing) and
Afghanistan (and losing worse), and probably be in Pakiland pretty soon,
too. Gunfire there already with US troops. And, we have another 40,000
blackwater (i.e. state-supported "terrorism") via unofficial "soldiers".
but they just don't have a clue what they are
> doing
You underestimate "them."
marika
"Stray Dog" <sdog...@sdf.lonestar.org> wrote in message
news:Pine.NEB.4.64.08...@sdf.lonestar.org...
>
>
> Fortunately the cold war got scotched by the economic disaster.
<<Since the end of the cold war, the US defense budget (not counting the DOE
budget which includes nuclear bomb upgrades, etc), has never gone down.
based on that fact, I'd hardly think that the cold war was ever scotched.>>
Here I meant the itty bitty post Georgia escalation
Russia had
> to close it's stock market down the other day because of the disastrous 58
> percent loss.
<<At the same time Russian military ships are visiting Venezuela, like it or
not (not to mention that Russian long range patrols have re-started), and
they have $100 bil trade surplus.>>
right now
> You can blame the US economy.
<<That is a separate subject. I'd rather blame the oil/commodity speculators
and the greedy-selfish scumbags that promoted the housing bubble.>>
o Look so did I
But you'd be at least somewhat
> wrong. The loss is at least in part attributable to low demand on oil.
> The
> price on that was artificially raised by speculators.
Yes.
But now, it's down
> again, and lower demand is expected to force Russian oil down to forty
> dollars a barrel.
<<I doubt it.>>
ok. tell Kagarlitsky not me
http://www.rttnews.com/Content/GeneralNews.aspx?Node=B1&Id=731007
The second reason: no one cares whether Georgia or Russia
> started it.
Everyone in the White House _says_ Russia is the badguy, but the
nitty-gritty is more complicated. S. Ossetia & Abkazhan didn't like their
own govt and the polls said those people were 90% against their own govt
(the Georgian) and if they had their way, they'd rather be part of Russia
than Georgia.
> They only care if their investments are sound. No one wants to
> do business with a volatile Russia.
<<On the contrary, Europe gets 1/3 of its energy from Russia, like it or
not.>>
that's of course, not the type of business I meant.
THey're victims of that circustance, but I am talking about investment, not
consumers.
THere was a very substantial investor withdrawal this last month
> Putin the lunatic just chewed out
> Tymoshenko today.
<<Yulia is a very pretty woman. Some reports say she is competant, too.
Probably at least as competant as GWB. Maybe more.>>
She is quite beautiful and quite a bit older than she looks. I've seen her
up close and personal btw. She is very very very brilliant. She is also
not exactly the most trustworthy person on the planet.
They are getting themselves into more and more trouble and
> blaming the US more and more
<<Might be right, after all, we (the US) are in Iraq (and losing) and
Afghanistan (and losing worse), and probably be in Pakiland pretty soon,
too. Gunfire there already with US troops. And, we have another 40,000
blackwater (i.e. state-supported "terrorism") via unofficial "soldiers".>>
has nothing to do with Medvedev's diatribe to Merkel today
but they just don't have a clue what they are
> doing
<<You underestimate "them.">>
no I really don't. They really thought the world was gonna buy their
1984ian PR attempts post the Georgia thing. Why shouldn't the largely
Russian population of Ossetia and Abhkazia want to be Russian. Russia has
been imperialistically shoving their people into those territories now for
over 100 years. The indigenous population never really got to tell what
they want. Yea you can compare the native American and Australian aborigine
issue to this situation. I already did, somewhere else in another thread
which I don't feel like reposting. But, no matter what, I do not
underestimate the Russian's ability to overestimate the stupidity of the
rest of the world. They really still have that Soviet and Imperialistic
left over trace of "o if the government said it, it must be true". They
think that their still very nonindependent press is reliable and believed by
the rest of the world. They are just plain nuts and don't understand why
the rest of the world thinks they are nuts
Sure Hugo C will take advantage of this moment when they want to sell him
arms. But tomorrow he'll screw them when they aren't expecting it.
mk5000
"I can watch the countryside
And i can fall asleep
My family tree's
Losing all it's leaves "--In the Backseat, Arcade Fire
Stray Dog
On Fri, 3 Oct 2008, marika wrote:
> Date: Fri, 3 Oct 2008 21:39:26 -0400
> From: marika <marik...@gmail.com>
> Newsgroups: alt.computer.consultants, alt.politics.economics, sci.econ,
> soc.culture.indian, sci.research.careers,
> alt.usenet.legends.lester-mosley
> Subject: Re: Revisiting "The Dumbest Generation"
>
>
> "Stray Dog" <sdog...@sdf.lonestar.org> wrote in message
> news:Pine.NEB.4.64.08...@sdf.lonestar.org...
>
>> They only care if their investments are sound. No one wants to
>> do business with a volatile Russia.
>
> <<On the contrary, Europe gets 1/3 of its energy from Russia, like it or
> not.>>
>
> that's of course, not the type of business I meant.
> THey're victims of that circustance, but I am talking about investment, not
> consumers.
> THere was a very substantial investor withdrawal this last month
I'm not going to worry about Russia's problems as much as our (US)
problems (especially the ones we make for ourselves, by ourselves, or at
least the greedy-selfish selves).
>
>
>> Putin the lunatic just chewed out
>> Tymoshenko today.
>
> <<Yulia is a very pretty woman. Some reports say she is competant, too.
> Probably at least as competant as GWB. Maybe more.>>
>
> She is quite beautiful and quite a bit older than she looks. I've seen her
> up close and personal btw. She is very very very brilliant. She is also not
> exactly the most trustworthy person on the planet.
We have one, here, too, called Sarah Palin.
>
> They are getting themselves into more and more trouble and
>> blaming the US more and more
>
> <<Might be right, after all, we (the US) are in Iraq (and losing) and
> Afghanistan (and losing worse), and probably be in Pakiland pretty soon,
> too. Gunfire there already with US troops. And, we have another 40,000
> blackwater (i.e. state-supported "terrorism") via unofficial "soldiers".>>
>
> has nothing to do with Medvedev's diatribe to Merkel today
They all love to engage in backbiting, backstabbing. Read some history
books (I have read a lot in the last 10 years), it goes back thousands of
years.
> but they just don't have a clue what they are
>> doing
>
> <<You underestimate "them.">>
>
>
>
> no I really don't. They really thought the world was gonna buy their 1984ian
> PR attempts post the Georgia thing. Why shouldn't the largely Russian
> population of Ossetia and Abhkazia want to be Russian. Russia has been
> imperialistically shoving their people into those territories now for over
> 100 years. The indigenous population never really got to tell what they
> want. Yea you can compare the native American and Australian aborigine issue
> to this situation. I already did, somewhere else in another thread which I
> don't feel like reposting. But, no matter what, I do not underestimate the
> Russian's ability to overestimate the stupidity of the rest of the world.
Same is true of Bush, Cheney, Connie, Rummy, etc.
> They really still have that Soviet and Imperialistic left over trace of "o if
> the government said it, it must be true". They think that their still very
> nonindependent press is reliable and believed by the rest of the world. They
> are just plain nuts and don't understand why the rest of the world thinks
> they are nuts
And, you think there is a "true" and "free" press somewhere? And, an
unbiased audience of readers? And, teams of unbiased article authors
(reporters)?
> Sure Hugo C will take advantage of this moment when they want to sell him
> arms. But tomorrow he'll screw them when they aren't expecting it.
In any football game, all else being equal, if you have one team twice as
big as the other team, I will bet my money on the bigger team.
marika
"Stray Dog" <sdog...@sdf.lonestar.org> wrote in message
news:Pine.NEB.4.64.08...@sdf.lonestar.org...
>
newsreader on reply so I'll aggregate a few thoughts.
In today's global economy, it is hard to ignore financial problems in the
rest of the world.
Sarah Palin may well have been studying Yulia, she has a lot more to learn
from her though. The first thing I said to myself on meeting her was Rock
Star. Followed by "whom I don't trust"
My thought on press is: yes, I knew you would say "and you think press is
free elsewhere". I was expecting that rejoinder. It's relative. Still
when you compare the US press to the Russian, there just aren't as many
journalists losing their jobs or going to jail in the US as elsewhere.
Russia continues to have those little problems. I wish I could remember
where I saw that report, but the problem is still important enough tThe
biggest problem with the US media isn't access by the press or the people.
It's that a great many of the USians I meet have no interest in what the
media COULD say if they were interested. As far as me reading about the
history of Eastern Europe. I have to lol at that one. My family is from
that part of the world. I have been learning that history since I have been
a little kid.
And finally, with regard to your analogy about betting on the football team
with the largest guys. Sure, but what if that team never quite understood
what a touchdown is or how you score the game, and every time they get a
touchdown, it's on the wrong side of the field and the points keep getting
racked up for the opponents. Brawn isn't really everything in that game.
mk5000
"My man put the battery in my back, a difference from Energizer
Sentence begins indented.. with formality
My duration's infinite, moneywise or physiology
Poetry, that's a part of me, retardedly bop"--nas, memory lane
marika
"PeterBP" <no...@jose.com> wrote in message
news:1in3pcv.j4yuy51ek6vhuN%no...@jose.com...
> Stray Dog <sdog...@sdf.lonestar.org> wrote:
>
>> Pardon me, I misspelled the title. It is "Anathem." I might even be
>> interested to read it.
>>
>
> I have it on my wishlist. Neal S. tends to be a good author, althugh the
> Diamond Age ad Cryptonomicon were quite long-winded.
>
This book sounds interesting. I've read the other 2 and Snow Crash as well.
Neal is very imaginative. What he has real problems with is actually coming
up with a conclusion to the story.
mk5000
"Rappers I monkey flip em with the funky rhythm I be kickin
Musician, inflictin composition
of pain I'm like Scarface sniffin cocaine
Holdin a M-16, see with the pen I'm extreme, now"--NY State of Mind, Nas
marika
"1297" <12...@npspam.com> wrote in message
news:6itnhr...@mid.individual.net...
> Stray Dog <sdog...@sdf.lonestar.org> wrote:
>
> Sure, but you don't need to when a few gung ho individuals like Lenin and
> Mao and Cromwell etc are prepared to turn the current world on its head.
It looks that way, but I can't tell.
>
> Google and Gates and Wikipedia in spades.
>
>>> Same with Marx and Engels. No real evidence that they produced
>>> anything much, more that society was moving in that direction and
>>> they were preaching to the choir on the issues they covered.
>
>> My opinion is that we need a mixed govt.
>
> Every modern first world govt is mixed. Even the US has large swags
> of socialism, most obviously with public education and medical facilities,
> let alone social security and Medicare/Medicade etc.
>
>> Soviet system is not the way to go. But, unregulated capitalism
>
> No modern first world country has ever had that.
>
>> will give monopolies and CEO-kings. If they are allowed to do ANYthing
>> they want, they will end up with 99% of all the money and power.
>
> And that is the main reason the US went for its antitrust laws.
I have been making this argument in favor of more regulation in the
financial sector for some time now.
If someone murdered someone in order to take their real estate or stock
portfolio or carrier bonds or to get favorable information to make a killer
investment, the government could step in and do something. (I know this
because I have watched many legal shows on tv).
If a company tries to dominate the market, the government can step in (poor
Bill Gates, so much money spent for what! I think maybe to get fame for one
set of lawyers and fortune for the other) Allegedly to keep the economy
from falling apart
and they can have an SEC to regulate against certain forms of fraud
Then a government should be able to regulate the frauds that engendered
Enron and then THIS.
I don't see the difference from a policy perspective.
mk5000
"'cos when the pistol blows a shot that's when a murder be the cool
one"--nas, one love
marika
"Stray Dog" <sdog...@sdf.lonestar.org> wrote in message
news:Pine.NEB.4.64.08...@sdf.lonestar.org...
>
> the decline in knowledge and skills among our younger generation.
>
> Here is a book review out of tuesday's WSJ, Sept 9, 2008, page A23:
>
> title: "Internet-Free And glad of It"
>
> The review is by Paul Boutin
>
> the book is "Anatem" (a novel) by Neal Stephenson
>
>
> Here is a quote of the first paragraph:
>
> "Is Google making us stupid? Intellectuals fret that the internet's
> instant-answer machine may be making us dumber, as we learn to solve
> problems without applying long-term mental effort. 'I'm not thinking the
> way I used to think', worried technology pundit Nicholas Carr in a recent
> Atlantic Monthly article. After 10 years of Internet immersion, Mr. Carr
> finds that when he attempts to read a book his concentration wanes after
> three pages. "
>
>
>
> The rest of the article...find it yourself if you are interested.
>
> Reminded me of Sir Thomas More's "Utopia" (of some 500 years ago).
>
I had been experiencing this for some time, but it started way before the
internet.
After thinking a very long time about it, I realized that it's actually a
product of a number of things. Other stimuli in the room. Intruding
thoughts from the day as in - o no I forgot to make lunch for tomorrow.
Intruding thoughts that are the product of thoughts spurred by the book. As
I start thinking about what the author is saying, my mind wanders because I
am going down this or that path. I was able to get through a book a day
when a teen. The difference then is that I was intaking information. Now I
am analyzing the information. So I get stopped in my tracks with mind
wandering because books are no longer solely the teacher. However, also, as
I got older and see less and less well - it's really hard to find a
comfortable position for reading. I can't find any setting with glasses
that doesn't inevitably result in givng me a head and neck ache. The only
way to combat that is to raise the book to my eyes. That makes my arms hurt
after a while. So reading on a screen is easier, because I can adjust the
font size and keep changing my position as I need to in order to maximize
comfort.
The internet hasn't made me dumber, just more aware of options in reading.
Some of you may like this song - to the others, my sincere apologies.
mk5000
"check it out
When I'm chillin I grab the buddha, get my crew to buy beers
And watch a flick, illin and root for the villian, huh
Plus every morning, I go out and love it sort of chilly
Then I send a shorty from my block to the store for Phillies"--One Time 4
For Your Mind , Nas
marika
"(David P.)" <imb...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:34c79b6e-9f53-495b...@m36g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
> It's not fair to future generations to have to live in
> more crowded conditions, and to have to fight
> over food, fuel, clean air & water & everything else.
> We need population control. Stopping the
> suppression of influenza would be a good
> place to start.
> .
the vaccines aren't all that effective are they?
my father has been getting them for a decade now but persists in getting the
flu yearly, worse every year. I think it's because he's using the vaccine.
It's not like he socializes so much that he is exposed to the bug.
mk5000
"And every projects, all over
To my man, Big Will he's still here *echoes*
The 40 side of Vernon
My man Big L.E.S."--nas, represent
Stray Dog
On Sat, 4 Oct 2008, marika wrote:
> Date: Sat, 4 Oct 2008 09:53:10 -0400
> From: marika <marik...@gmail.com>
> Newsgroups: alt.computer.consultants, alt.politics.economics, sci.econ,
> soc.culture.indian, sci.research.careers,
> alt.usenet.legends.lester-mosley
> Subject: Re: Revisiting "The Dumbest Generation"
>
>
> "Stray Dog" <sdog...@sdf.lonestar.org> wrote in message
> news:Pine.NEB.4.64.08...@sdf.lonestar.org...
>>
> I'm snipping most of this because your post doesn't work well in the
> newsreader on reply so I'll aggregate a few thoughts.
> In today's global economy, it is hard to ignore financial problems in the
> rest of the world.
How about you read the papers anywhere and notice that almost none of them
talk about financial problems outside of their own neighborhood.
> Sarah Palin may well have been studying Yulia, she has a lot more to learn
> from her though. The first thing I said to myself on meeting her was Rock
> Star. Followed by "whom I don't trust"
> My thought on press is: yes, I knew you would say "and you think press is
> free elsewhere". I was expecting that rejoinder. It's relative. Still when
> you compare the US press to the Russian, there just aren't as many
> journalists losing their jobs or going to jail in the US as elsewhere. Russia
> continues to have those little problems.
Let me tell you something. The censorship in the US media is not obvious
but it is there. The media is not interested in truth or thinking; it is
interested in getting readers to buy the content and watch commercials or
see the advertisements.
Years ago I saw a late night TV program, one hour long, on censorship in
the US media. I was amazed that it even got on our TV. If there is any
chance that a newspaper article was going to have a negative impact on
some corporation's contract to buy advertising space, then that article
was killed. They gave examples in the TV program.
Also, I'm going to tell you there are books, here, on censorship and
banned books not to mention "pressure groups" trying all kinds of things
to get books, content, etc., out of public libraries and off TV.
I wish I could remember where I saw
> that report, but the problem is still important enough tThe biggest problem
> with the US media isn't access by the press or the people. It's that a great
> many of the USians I meet have no interest in what the media COULD say if
> they were interested. As far as me reading about the history of Eastern
> Europe. I have to lol at that one. My family is from that part of the
> world. I have been learning that history since I have been a little kid.
I have been learning, for the last 10 years, about history all over the
world since the beginnings of history, 4,000 years ago,
> And finally, with regard to your analogy about betting on the football team
> with the largest guys. Sure, but what if that team never quite understood
> what a touchdown is or how you score the game, and every time they get a
> touchdown, it's on the wrong side of the field and the points keep getting
> racked up for the opponents. Brawn isn't really everything in that game.
Most of the time it is. History shows few exceptions.
Then, we need to talk about cheating. I've seen several books on this. One
book is about sports: the exact title is-"It ain't cheating if you don't
get caught".
Stray Dog
On Sat, 4 Oct 2008, marika wrote:
> Date: Sat, 4 Oct 2008 11:02:58 -0400
> From: marika <marik...@gmail.com>
> Newsgroups: alt.computer.consultants, alt.politics.economics, sci.econ,
> soc.culture.indian, sci.research.careers,
> alt.usenet.legends.lester-mosley
> Subject: Re: Revisiting "The Dumbest Generation"
>
>
> "(David P.)" <imb...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
> news:34c79b6e-9f53-495b...@m36g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
>
>> It's not fair to future generations to have to live in
>> more crowded conditions, and to have to fight
>> over food, fuel, clean air & water & everything else.
>> We need population control. Stopping the
>> suppression of influenza would be a good
>> place to start.
>> .
>
>
> the vaccines aren't all that effective are they?
A factor in eficacy is individual biological variability. There will
always be a fraction of the entire population that gets innoculated that
will not be protected by the shots. You'll need to read immunology to
learn more.
The other problem is side effects. Still another problem is that
another small population of people who get the shot actually comes down
with the disease that the shots were meant to protect against. If you do
your homework, you can learn more about this on your own.
> my father has been getting them for a decade now but persists in getting the
> flu yearly, worse every year.
Some people develop a sensitivity where they become more sensitive, or
their immune system starts failing.
Stray Dog
Well, folks, the more economics I read, or read about, the more I find
more disagreement between economists. Is economics a science?
Here it is:
"The Failure of the 'New Economics'" by Henry Hazlitt.
The subtitle is "An analysis of the Keynesian Fallacies"
A front page endorsement says:
"An analysis of Keynesian economics that 'destroys the
whole Keynesian theory'"--Raymond Moley, Newsweek.
Now, is it the truth, or what?
Here is a clue: on the back page of the dust jacket, at the bottom of the
page is this line: "A sellection of the conservative book club"
Hmmmm, might not have to read the book after all, eh?
Well, I'll tell you about another book that looks non-partisan:
"Debunking Economics" by Steve Keen.
A professor in a department of economics in Australia, and he blasts all
of them, not just one particular kind.
-----------
Here, below, however, are my other favorite books on economics and
reviews of each, plus some quotes:
-------
Some books I found that helped me better understand economics, at
least in the sense of practical and real-life worldly situations (eg.
Globalization). The may help some of you, too.
First the list of titles and authors. Farther down (below the double
line of "=" signs) are respective comments or quotes, shorter or
longer, of significant ideas. Rows of slashes (////) separate each
review.
= = = = = =
1. "The International Money Game" by Robert Z. Aliber (4th edition,
356 pp, 1983, Basic Books).
2. "The Proper Study of Mankind" by Stuart Chase, revised edition, c
1956. See the chapter (# 19) "Is Economics a Science?"
3. "Debunking Economics-The Naked Emperor of the Social Sciences"
by: Steve Keen (University of Western Sydney, Austrialia)
4. "Lost Prophets - An Insider's History of the Modern Economists"
by: Alfred L. Malabre, Jr. (1994, isbn 0-87584-644-0, 256 pp incl
index)
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
= = = = = = = = comments/reviews below = = = =
1. "The International Money Game" by Robert Z. Aliber (4th edition,
356 pp, 1983, Basic Books).
Here is a quote from the preface:
"International finance is frequently viewed as esoteric, understood
only by a few skilled speculators in the British pound and the Japanese
yen, and central bankers. In part, the mystery results from the
specialized use of everyday language--[list of esoteric terms omitted].
The words seem common enough, but the meanings and significance are
elusive. The reader is deterred because of the effort required to learn an
esoteric language"
"As the jargon barrier is surmounted, a second problem appears--recognized
experts in the field frequently disagree about the explanations for
the same event. Is the dollar "strong" because U.S. imports are down due
to the recession, or because U.S. interests are high, or because the U.S.
inflation rate is down? ...."
"And then, even if the experts agree, their recommendations for policy
actions differ. [and several examples are given]."
And, so, there was no jargon, no abstract curves, no daunting calculus
but a lot of easy to understand talk. Not only that, but there was low
dogma; Aliber talked about many issues and provided multiple
interpretations for these issues and barely ever took sides. A great deal
of the book went into economic history--for context--over the important
economies of the globe and going back about 100 years, and including
multiple business cycles. A flavor of the book can be discerned from some
of the chapter titles: 1. The name of the game is money, 6. They invented
money so they could have inflation, 8. The Dollar and Coca-cola are both
brand names, 10. Central bankers read election returns, not balance
sheets, 11. Monetary reform--Where do the problems go when they are
assumed away?, 14. International tax avoidance--a game for the rich.
The author, Aliber, is professor of International Finance and
Economics at the University of Chicago. It did not escape my attention
that one of the people who gave this book an endorsement was Charles P.
Kindleberger, who is prof of economics at MIT, and I read his book "World
in Depression" which was also very well written (meaning no or almost no
jargon, easy to read, no BS, outstanding research and citation of the
relevant literature and history, an undogmatic view of the problem, and
whose work revealed that the whole world economy was actually going into a
slump BEFORE the US 1929 stock market crash). Kindleberger's book, unlike
Aliber's book, is massively referenced. I wonder if there was anything
that Kindleberger didn't read.
///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
2. "The Proper Study of Mankind" by Stuart Chase, revised edition, c
1956. See the chapter (# 19) "Is Economics a Science?"
page 197-
"'The Republican congressional leaders are preparing to go ahead with
their plan to cut taxes, but economists disagree as to whether a
reduction would be inflationary or deflationary. Those fellows have the
whole thing down to an inexact science.' As one who has written several
books on economics, I confess that my mirth at this crack in the New
Yorker is somewhat forced. Our "science" is fortified with many learned
theories and many impressive curves and graphs, but repeatedly it proves
unreliable for prediction, the acid test of science as we have seen.
George Soule once wrote a book called The Useful Art of Economics, but one
may ask--and many do--how useful is a body of doctrine which says that
things will go up which then go down, or will go down which presently go
up? Despite the frequent failure of prediction, economics is a popular
subject, with flourishing departments and business schools in the
universities. It wins great attention in financial sections of the
newspapers, and is pursued in magazines, monographs, and books without
number. If, for the purposes of discussion, we divide the field into three
parts, General Theory, Special Theory, and Practical Economics, a
pleasanter and more revealing landscape appears. The two big General
Theories in the world today--Ricardian and Marxian--are dogmatic,
contradictory, and not reliable for prediction. What the theory says will
happen usually does not happen."
On pages 199-201, the author listed a total of fifteen predictions, as
they dealt with economics issues over more than two decades, and from
a credible tone in his writing, indicated that research showed all
fifteen predictions to have been contradicted by what actually happened.
page 202:
"The _Economist_ of London has put its finger on one source of the
trouble. As perhaps the leading economic journal of the world the
_Economist_ speaks with authority [footnote gave the date]:
Economics is a curious science, if indeed is is a science
at all. The investigator who digs down through the textbook
generalizations in the physical sciences finds at their root
a series of facts, checked by carefully controlled experiments,
and as accurately known as human ingenuity can compass. The
investigator who does the same for economics, penetrating
the smoke screen of curves and mathematical symbols, will
find not facts, but a series of elementary psychological
assumptions checked, if at all, by crude common sense. And,
like most assumptions of this kind, he will find that most of
them are wrong....It is this lack of a solid factual basis
which has brought it about that, while the Army is alleged
to be always winning the last war, economists are almost
invariably engaged in defeating the last slump....
There have of course been correct predictions" (but with caveats
beyond the scope of this essay).
page 203- chapter subsection entitled "Big Theory: Ricardo"
"For almost a century, economic theory has been dominated by two
schools which largely contradict each other. The laissez faire or
classical school holds that the government should keep out of practically
everything, while the Marxist school holds that it ought to get into
practically everything. The former has been preferred by most American
economists, the latter by many European...."
Page 204-
"[Elton Mayo] cited Chester I. Barnard, at the time president of the
New Jersey Telephone Company, who complained that he could find no
treatise in all economic literature which covered business organization as
he had to deal with it day by day. Mr. Barnard finally had to write his
own book about it, which he called The Function of the Executive. Worse
still, said Mr. Barnard, economists fail to recognize the extreme
importance of _organization_ as the principal structural aspect of society
itself."
page 206-
"Thorstein Veblen anticipated Mitchell in his Theory of the Leisure
Class, published at the turn of the century. It was an ironical amalgam of
anthropology and economics. He undertook to show how members of the
upper-upper class in America helped to maintain status by what he
called 'conspicuous consumption'--big town and country houses, steam
yachts, retinues of servants, diamond tiaras, fox-hunting, and collections
of Old Masters. The study dates a bit today, but it was acute observation
before World War I, and before the graduated income tax."
page 208-subsection of chapter entitled: "Is Economics A Science?"
"We are back at the initial question raised in this chapter, and so
far as the two big theories are concerned the answer seems to be 'no'.
When one examines the operations [and he gives a long list of examples]
the dynamic happenings therein do not correspond to the economic theories
about them, either Ricardian or Marxian. The universe of the atom has been
described, but not the economic universe--not in such terms that you can
make an economic bomb with it. Economic bombs go off [globalization?],
right enough, but nobody knows exactly why. For 30 years I have been
reading economic literature, and as a professional accountant I have had
an intimate view of many business enterprises.... None of them [the
economic theories] fits the objective realities which I have seen."
The above quotes came from the book: "The Proper Study of Mankind" by
Stuart Chase (Harper & Brothers NY, revised edition, c's 1948, 1956).
The book has a selected bibliography containing many hundreds of books.
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
title: Debunking Economics-The Naked Emperor of the Social Sciences
by: Steve Keen (University of Western Sydney, Austrialia)
2001, Pluto Press, reprinted 2002, 335 pp, incl index,
ISBN 1856499928 (softcover)
About one half of the book is as technical (complete with complex
diagrams, graphs, tables) as any book on economics that I've seen.
I followed very little of this material. For this part of the book,
I skimmed the material at greater rates when it was too deep for
my background (roughly pages 23 to 147 where the material
becomes easier to follow) and at slower rates when it was easier
to grasp. I would estimate that a proper reading would surely
require that I read about five to ten more books on relevant
economics. Moreover, this book made reference to additional
material on several websites. Otherwise, the other half of the
book is quite readable and an average reader will get much from
spending time with the book. Overall, I would rate this book as
very important.
As part of the blurb (printed on the back of the softcover), we
find the sentences: "Do economists really know what they are
talking about?" and "If you ever doubted the advice or reasoning
of economists, but haven't known how to argue against them,
'Debunking Economics' is the book for you. It takes you inside
conventional economic theory to show that almost everything
economists believe is wrong. 'Debunking Economics' is necessary
ammunition for anyone who wants to build a decent society,
rather than a dysfunctional one...." The blurb even included some
endorsements and some of them are economists, themselves!
What I could grasp, however, showed that this author was willing to
not only complain about serious shortcomings in his own
specialization (his bibliography shows that he has published many
papers in economics journals) but give very detailed reasons for
_debunking_ a wide range of thinking in today's mainstream
economics. The applicability of the author's criticisms to real
life is easy to see from his views on many issues. A few examples
from the first twenty pages include:
p.2-3: Keen carefully explains how much of the late 20th century
world economy was formed by the influence of economists and that
much of the world has improved thereby. However, many crises took
place (1990s: LTCM, Russia, Mexico, Asia, etc), too. Keen explains
how Russia was attempting to move from a command economy to a
market economy and that Stiglitz and Arrow tried to encourage a
slow transition while other economists encouraged a rapid
transition and that imperative won out. The result? Keen cites
Stiglitz as saying "The rapid privatization urged upon Moscow by
the IMF and the [US] Treasury Department had allowed a small group
of oligarchs to gain control of state assets... While the
government lacked the money to pay pensioners, the oligarchs were
sending money obtained by stripping assets and selling the
country's precious natural resources into Cypriot and Swiss bank
accounts (Stiglitz, 2000" [The New Republic, April 17-24, 56-60].
Keen also said (p.3) "Stiglitz tells a similar tale of the impact
economists had on the Asian crisis, where the IMF's enforcement of
austerity seriously worsened a crisis which had been initiated by
the international capital markets (Stiglitz, 1998 [The New Republic
Online, 9 September], and 2000 [see above])."
p. 8: "Economists would contend that these changes have made the
world a better place, not because economists have actually verified
that the changes have been beneficial, but because the changes have
made the real world look more like the hypothetical world of the
economic textbook.... Where problems have occured, economists
normally assert that this was because their advice was not followed
properly."
And, thus the book continues with similar major grenades launched
at major targets in the workings of economics every few pages.
Around page 148 is a major attack on Milton Friedman. Keen says
that Friedman says that "...a theory cannot be judged by its
assumptions, but only by the accuracy of its predictions."
///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
title:"Lost Prophets - An Insider's History of the
Modern Economists"
by: Alfred L. Malabre, Jr. (1994, isbn 0-87584-644-0,
256 pp incl index)
One endorsement from the back cover::
"An engaging story of a loss of faith by the leading
economics reporter of the nation's leading business
daily." by David Warsh, Boston Globe.
Bio on the author:
"Alfred L. Malabre, Jr., was economics editor of the
Wall Street Journal for 25 years."
Free of jargon, full of creditable frankness, easy to
read, and many pages of references and an index of neon-
sign names, this is one of the best books I've read to
give an overview of US relevant economic history as it
involves famous economists since about the 1930s-1940s
to the early 1990s. And, the author sure seemed to me to
be apolitical. Let's just read some quotes.
Page 2:
"Some findings are disturbing, showing how misguided,
even wrongheaded, economists have often been in their
assessments of the economy and, as a consequence, in
their counsel to policy makers. Occasionally, the
resulting damage to the economy--and ultimately to our
living standards--has been considerable."
Page 5:
"...and after monetarism's failure came the so-called
supply-side theorists who convinced Ronald Reagan that
the path to sustained prosperity was through something
called the Laffer-curve, a parabola promising that steep
tax-rate reductions would unleash such a burst of
economic activity that the economy's various woes would
disappear. Nothing of the sort occurred."
Page 7:
A description of economics by the author "...it
constitutes, at best, a pseudoscience and, at worst, a
guessing game, often wildly inaccurate, frequently
carried on by clever bamboozlers whose academic
credentials may far exceed any possible contributions
they may make to the betterment of mankind."
The rest of the chapter deals with many details relating
to the Bretton Woods system and the author's view that
most economists misread the interval from WWI to WWII.
Page 26:
"John Kenneth Galbraith of Harvard has said of Bretton
Woods, 'There can have been few international meetings
in the history of such convocations where public
comprehension of what was occurring or even of what was
being attempted was so slight...."
Page 62:
After many pages dealing with the thoughts and actions
of Arthur Burns (starting on the CEA, then chair of the
Fed), things in the economy were not going well and "He
offered a clue to his thinking at a congressional
hearing held about that time. 'The rules of economics
are not working in quite the way they used to.' he
stated." which was followed by numerous relationships
and changes that were not according to predictions.
From about page 65+ we move into Milton Friedmanism and
a wonderful, short, easy to understand summary of what
he stood for. Here (page 69) is part of the short
version: His views are: "...on government controls (get
rid of them); the reason for the Great Depression (a
benighted Federal Reserve Board); the welfare system
(scrap it); egalitarianism (it's dangerous); public
education (overhaul it); consumer protection (don't
trust Uncle Sam or Ralph Nader); worker protection
(don't trust the unions); inflation (control the money
supply); and individual freedom (battle bureacratic
bloat)."
On page 72 is the following passage:
"...Walter Heller [a Kenesian, by the way] confessed
that the Chicago professor's concepts seemed wonderful.
But unlike his own prescriptions, Heller went on,
Friedman's would surely work only in heaven. By and
large, Heller turned out to be right about Friedman's
concepts and wrong about his own...the emerging truth
was that nothing seemed to work very well, at least as
far as strategies for sustaining the American economy
were concerned."
Page 81, a lovely passage:
In connection with the steel union, steel prices, and
attempts to increase productivity, US Steel decided to
raise the price of steel and "Kennedy's reaction was
immediate. He was outraged...." There was an impending
showdown. "During the showdown, in a much-quoted remark,
Kennedy declared: 'My father always told me that all
business-men were sons-of-bitches, but I never believed
it until now.' And, all the steel companies chose to not
raise their prices.
Page 83+:
A number of pages, starting here, give the author's view
of a conference hosted by the Federal Reserve Bank of
Boston in 1983. The subject was about how much we should
worry about the Federal debt. The results were, to use
the author's own words, "unintentionally hilarious." For
all of the expert speakers and their talks, a clear
picture (or consensus) did not emerge. One speaker
handed out his presentation in written form before his
talk, but then when he rose to talk, he handed out a
"revised" copy with much of the earlier material taken
out.
Page 89:
"In his famous 1968 debate with Heller at NY University,
Milton Friedman declared bluntly that 'so far as I know,
there has been no empirical demonstration that the tax
cuts had any effect on the total flow of income' in the
years after legislation. In retrospect, income is only
one of many facets of the economic scene that appear to
have benefitted little, if at all, from the tax cuts.
Page 118:
"How accurately did the various forecasters [economists]
predict the 1969-79 recession? Not very accurately at
all, the record shows--despite the considerable increase
in their ranks."
Page 119:
"Credentials, I should add, seemed to matter little.
Most economists, then as now, were degree-laden,
typically sporting a doctorate as well as a master's
degree in economics. But there was little relationship
between the accuracy of individual forecasts and the
academic backgrounds of particular forecasters. Few
economists coule match the credentials of Milton
Friedman, even before the outspoken professor captured
the Nobel Prize. Yet, his performance as a forecaster
was abysmal." After giving details, the author said
"Friedman's optimistic scenario proved utterly wrong."
Page 120:
"Indeed, occasionally there seemed to be an inverse
relationship between forecasting accuracy and
credentials."
Page 131:
"The idea that big unions commanded big pay increases
simply does not square with the facts." This whole
chapter ("The New Confusion") deals with many labor cost
lines of thinking or conventional wisdom that are not
backed up by facts.
Page 163 (in a whole chapter on monetarists)
Somewhere around the 1970s "...monetarism was finally
put into practice by Washington's policy makers, and the
result, sadly, tarnished severely, if not emolished, the
validity of its proponents' theories [there were many of
Freidman's students who also promoted monetarism]. A
major casualty, of course, was Milton Friedman. As
William Greider recalls in _Secrets of the Temple_,
Friedman's forecasts in the early 1980s of, first, an
inflationary surge and, next, a 1984 recession proved
'spectacularly wrong.' And, both forecasts, of course,
were based largely on the movement of the money supply.
Friedman, to his credit, eventually admitted 'I was
wrong,' and offered what must have been, for his
monetarist disciples, a disquieting addendum: 'And I
have no good explanation as to why I was wrong'
[reference given]."
Further on in the book is a chapter on supply-side
economics (and the Laffer curve), complete with an
assortment of expert economist thoughts on how it won't
work or can't work. And, more predictions (by
economists) that didn't come to pass. Another chapter
brings up the question of the validity of the data that
economists use and I, myself, have seen enough articles
on discrepancies, weaknesses, and inaccuracies to wonder
how much this influences study conclusions. The last
chapter ends on a muted positive note (new kinds of
thinkers are coming on board), but no reason to think
they will be doing any more good than the ones that came
before. The book also carries a central group of
photographs of most of the big name economists and some
of the captions are hilariously unflattering.
Rod Speed
> "(David P.)" <imb...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
> news:34c79b6e-9f53-495b...@m36g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
>
>> It's not fair to future generations to have to live in
>> more crowded conditions, and to have to fight
>> over food, fuel, clean air & water & everything else.
>> We need population control. Stopping the
>> suppression of influenza would be a good
>> place to start.
> the vaccines aren't all that effective are they?
Yes they are.
> my father has been getting them for a decade now but persists in getting the flu yearly, worse every year.
Its MUCH more likely that he is actually getting the common cold and not flu.
> I think it's because he's using the vaccine.
You're wrong.
> It's not like he socializes so much that he is exposed to the bug.
It isnt just socializing, even basic stuff like shopping is enough.
Michael Coburn
There is a lot of "should" in what you offer. But until there is a
better understanding of civics and economics by the people and until
these better educated people have a greater voice in their government,
all the "should" is going to be irrelevant:
http://GreaterVoice.org/extend
"I know no safe depository of the ultimate powers of society but the
people themselves; and if we think them not enlightened enough to
exercise their control with a wholesome discretion, the remedy is not to
take it from them, but to inform their discretion by education." - Thomas
Jefferson
Michael Coburn
thought I'd hijack all that and try to address the cause of "The Dumbest
Genration" and, perhaps offer some suggestions to get out of the current
"dummy" trajectory.
To say that the current electorate is "dumb" is to suggest that they are
either ignorant or stupid or both. That may not be the "correct" use of
the word "dumb" but it is the intent of it. There is no real cure for
stupidity but there is a cure for ignorance. The divergence concerning
education is probably as old as the "right left" divergence; the argument
about stupidity or intellectual ability being an inherited trait. The
liberals believe that intellect is more an environmental condition than
it is an inherited condition and the conservatives tend to think that
breeding is the dominant force. Being a true liberal I put much more
emphasis on the ignorance than on the stupidity; I believe that education
is the key to most of the real afflictions that would constitute the use
of the word "dumb".
People do not seem to know how their government was designed to work, nor
or they cognizant of rudimentary economic principles. And this is why
our government is failing and it is why this the "Dumbest Generation".
The solution is non mathematical economics (classical economics) and much
more early American history an civics. The science and math needs to be
there too, but we are failing miserably in our teaching of the subjects
that really matter in a representative form of government.
marika
"Stray Dog" <sdog...@sdf.lonestar.org> wrote in message
news:Pine.NEB.4.64.08...@sdf.lonestar.org...
>
> On Sat, 4 Oct 2008, marika wrote:
>
>> Date: Sat, 4 Oct 2008 09:53:10 -0400
>> From: marika <marik...@gmail.com>
>> Newsgroups: alt.computer.consultants, alt.politics.economics, sci.econ,
>> soc.culture.indian, sci.research.careers,
>> alt.usenet.legends.lester-mosley
>> Subject: Re: Revisiting "The Dumbest Generation"
>>
>> "Stray Dog" <sdog...@sdf.lonestar.org> wrote in message
>> news:Pine.NEB.4.64.08...@sdf.lonestar.org...
>>>
>> I'm snipping most of this because your post doesn't work well in the
>> newsreader on reply so I'll aggregate a few thoughts.
>> In today's global economy, it is hard to ignore financial problems in the
>> rest of the world.
>
> How about you read the papers anywhere and notice that almost none of them
> talk about financial problems outside of their own neighborhood.
Ironically, I live in DC.
And what I read is about the different states having problems floating their
bonds right now (14 I believe), note that the EU met yesterday because of
the global effect. China has been rumored to have told us no more
financing.
Clearly I have heard no rhetoric during the stump speeches or the debates
about the global nature of the problem. The word Europe would probably
cause an immediate loss for the candidate that said it. But you do hear
them say global once in a while.
>
>> Sarah Palin may well have been studying Yulia, she has a lot more to
>> learn from her though. The first thing I said to myself on meeting her
>> was Rock Star. Followed by "whom I don't trust"
>> My thought on press is: yes, I knew you would say "and you think press
>> is free elsewhere". I was expecting that rejoinder. It's relative.
>> Still when you compare the US press to the Russian, there just aren't as
>> many journalists losing their jobs or going to jail in the US as
>> elsewhere. Russia continues to have those little problems.
>
> Let me tell you something. The censorship in the US media is not obvious
> but it is there. The media is not interested in truth or thinking; it is
> interested in getting readers to buy the content and watch commercials or
> see the advertisements.
>
> Years ago I saw a late night TV program, one hour long, on censorship in
> the US media. I was amazed that it even got on our TV. If there is any
> chance that a newspaper article was going to have a negative impact on
> some corporation's contract to buy advertising space, then that article
> was killed. They gave examples in the TV program.
>
> Also, I'm going to tell you there are books, here, on censorship and
> banned books not to mention "pressure groups" trying all kinds of things
> to get books, content, etc., out of public libraries and off TV.
Boy do I know this is true. Remember when Karl Rove was president? His
grip over the media was legend. Of course today we don't know even the
tiniest bit of his abuses. Hopefully, this will come out as time goes on.
There's no question that when wealthy corporations back you, you will hold
some sway with the media
Karl is runing for office again, and he probably has the same backing this
time around although in light of the current economic problems, who knows
who is shoring up his concerns or who it is that can afford him anymore.
I'm also aware of the pressure groups trying to get books out of libraries.
However these groups are exercising free speech. All these v chips and
parental chips are good examples of this. Parental advisory stickers
another. TV stations must be responsive to FCC rules. Sometimes these
interest groups overreach but thankfully we have an alternative press,
bloggers and so on.
None of this can thrive in Russia. When the government says no, it's no.
Access to alternatives there are just not existent.
>
> I wish I could remember where I saw
>> that report, but the problem is still important enough tThe biggest
>> problem with the US media isn't access by the press or the people. It's
>> that a great many of the USians I meet have no interest in what the media
>> COULD say if they were interested. As far as me reading about the
>> history of Eastern Europe. I have to lol at that one. My family is from
>> that part of the world. I have been learning that history since I have
>> been a little kid.
>
> I have been learning, for the last 10 years, about history all over the
> world since the beginnings of history, 4,000 years ago,
>
I have been learning for more time than that of course. Welcome to the club
>> And finally, with regard to your analogy about betting on the football
>> team with the largest guys. Sure, but what if that team never quite
>> understood what a touchdown is or how you score the game, and every time
>> they get a touchdown, it's on the wrong side of the field and the points
>> keep getting racked up for the opponents. Brawn isn't really everything
>> in that game.
>
> Most of the time it is. History shows few exceptions.
>
> Then, we need to talk about cheating. I've seen several books on this. One
> book is about sports: the exact title is-"It ain't cheating if you don't
> get caught".
>
>
Yeah go Patriots and your little video camera on the grassy knoll. lol.
Say it ain't so wasn't muttered for the first time by Sara Palin on
Thursday. The Poor Sox have tumbled so far.
mk5000
>
>
"Blessed with a bucket of lucky mobility
My mom I love her cause she love me
Long gone are the times when she scrub me
Feelin good my brother gonna hug me"--give it away, red hot chili peppers
marika
"Stray Dog" <sdog...@sdf.lonestar.org> wrote in message
news:Pine.NEB.4.64.08...@sdf.lonestar.org...
>>
> always be a fraction of the entire population that gets innoculated that
> will not be protected by the shots. You'll need to read immunology to
> learn more.
>
>
this sounds good
but doesn't explain why his resistance gets worse instead of about the same
mk5000
"at this time plasticine and puppet animation was out of fashion. the video
showed you could do stuff yourself"--Michel Gondry
marika
"Michael Coburn" <mik...@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:gc8bi...@news6.newsguy.com...
>
> There is a lot of "should" in what you offer. But until there is a
> better understanding of civics and economics by the people and until
> these better educated people have a greater voice in their government,
> all the "should" is going to be irrelevant:
>
> http://GreaterVoice.org/extend
>
> "I know no safe depository of the ultimate powers of society but the
> people themselves; and if we think them not enlightened enough to
> exercise their control with a wholesome discretion, the remedy is not to
> take it from them, but to inform their discretion by education." - Thomas
> Jefferson
>
>
o a what the framers of the constitution meant.
A lot of things exist today that Jefferson didn't ever encounter. in his
imagination never mind his real life.
If you didn’t know yet, you do now
If the remedy is not take it from them, then we need to have done things -
prevented Wall street bandits from taking it from them. And now, keep the
bandit government out of passing budget bills that take it from them as they
have now with this bailout.
And, if we needed to educate them, where was the education.
I am a onservative on the government stay out of my bedroom issue.
I'd be a conservative on regulation of business if the government had in
fact not created the environment that allows these bandits and the bandit
government to take the people.
- the very complicated tax, security and financial environment btw that
permitted enron and the bailout disaster
where was Jefferson's education/.
The days of Jefferson where laissez faire was the norm and desire are long
over.
If you create regulations that enable thieves then you should be shoring it
up with laws that prevent the thieves from being successful.
The government didn't just fail to educate, they took fairly substantial
steps to obfuscate
mk5000
"Listen All of Y'all This Is Sabotage
I Can't Stand It, I Know You Planned It
I'ma Set It Straight This Watergate
I Can't Stand Rockin' When I'm In This Place"--Beastie Boys
marika
O come on, every one who was in grade school in the 80s knows. Someone
managed to fit some education in between Saturday morning cartoons.
Schoolhouse Rock covered how a bill is created, every Saturday. Most people
that age I know can sing absolutely all the songs to Schoolhouse Rock.
Therefore, I deem them aware and educated.
mk5000
the devil cuts loose
you blow blow blow blow blow your fuse
Mani Deli
>People do not seem to know how their government was designed to work, nor
>or they cognizant of rudimentary economic principles. And this is why
>our government is failing and it is why this the "Dumbest Generation".
>The solution is non mathematical economics (classical economics) and much
>more early American history an civics. The science and math needs to be
>there too, but we are failing miserably in our teaching of the subjects
>that really matter in a representative form of government.
The education you propose won't happen because the owners of this
country don't want that.
"The owners of this country count on the fact that Americans will
probably remain wilfully ignorant of the big Red White Blue dick
that's being jammed up their assholes every day. Because the owners of
this country know the truth, it's called the American Dream, because
you have to be asleep to believe it."
George Carlin on who really controls America--
watch the whole video. It says it all!
http://www.bestcyrano.org/carlinGeorgeWhoReally407.htm
Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them
are stupider than that. Carlin
Rod Speed
Most are too stupid to be able to understand any of that stuff.
The majority are so stupid that they believe that the CIA had Kennedy executed just because some fool put that in a
movie.
The vast majority are actually stupid enough to believe in some complete arsehole of a 'god' that just
yawned as 6M of its alleged 'chosen people' were gassed and pumped up the crematoria chimneys
and who ordered that kids should have the ends of their dicks hacked off on day 10 or whenever it is.
A hell of a lot of them believe that little green men rock up in UFOs and bite cows bums.
The only thing that works with fools that stupid is what we see Rove do.
Rod Speed
> Stray Dog <sdog...@sdf.lonestar.org> wrote
>> A factor in eficacy is individual biological variability. There will
>> always be a fraction of the entire population that gets innoculated
>> that will not be protected by the shots. You'll need to read
>> immunology to learn more.
> this sounds good
> but doesn't explain why his resistance gets worse instead of about the same
Thats a result of aging and is the reason the geriatrics are recommended to have flu shots, and because flu can kill
them.
Stray Dog
On Sun, 5 Oct 2008, marika wrote:
> Date: Sun, 5 Oct 2008 09:55:22 -0400
> From: marika <marik...@gmail.com>
> Newsgroups: alt.computer.consultants, alt.politics.economics, sci.econ,
> soc.culture.indian, sci.research.careers,
> alt.usenet.legends.lester-mosley
> Subject: Re: Revisiting "The Dumbest Generation"
>
>
> "Stray Dog" <sdog...@sdf.lonestar.org> wrote in message
> news:Pine.NEB.4.64.08...@sdf.lonestar.org...
>>
>> On Sat, 4 Oct 2008, marika wrote:
>>
>>> Date: Sat, 4 Oct 2008 09:53:10 -0400
>>> From: marika <marik...@gmail.com>
>>> Newsgroups: alt.computer.consultants, alt.politics.economics, sci.econ,
>>> soc.culture.indian, sci.research.careers,
>>> alt.usenet.legends.lester-mosley
>>> Subject: Re: Revisiting "The Dumbest Generation"
>>>
>>> "Stray Dog" <sdog...@sdf.lonestar.org> wrote in message
>>> news:Pine.NEB.4.64.08...@sdf.lonestar.org...
>>>>
>>> I'm snipping most of this because your post doesn't work well in the
>>> newsreader on reply so I'll aggregate a few thoughts.
>>> In today's global economy, it is hard to ignore financial problems in the
>>> rest of the world.
>>
>> How about you read the papers anywhere and notice that almost none of them
>> talk about financial problems outside of their own neighborhood.
>
> Ironically, I live in DC.
I live some 150 miles east of DC, and at one time lived in Bethesda.
> And what I read is about the different states having problems floating their
> bonds right now (14 I believe), note that the EU met yesterday because of the
> global effect. China has been rumored to have told us no more financing.
> Clearly I have heard no rhetoric during the stump speeches or the debates
> about the global nature of the problem. The word Europe would probably cause
> an immediate loss for the candidate that said it. But you do hear them say
> global once in a while.
Read the Wall Street Journal.
>>
>>> Sarah Palin may well have been studying Yulia, she has a lot more to learn
>>> from her though. The first thing I said to myself on meeting her was Rock
>>> Star. Followed by "whom I don't trust"
>>> My thought on press is: yes, I knew you would say "and you think press is
>>> free elsewhere". I was expecting that rejoinder. It's relative. Still
>>> when you compare the US press to the Russian, there just aren't as many
>>> journalists losing their jobs or going to jail in the US as elsewhere.
>>> Russia continues to have those little problems.
>>
>> Let me tell you something. The censorship in the US media is not obvious
>> but it is there. The media is not interested in truth or thinking; it is
>> interested in getting readers to buy the content and watch commercials or
>> see the advertisements.
>>
>> Years ago I saw a late night TV program, one hour long, on censorship in
>> the US media. I was amazed that it even got on our TV. If there is any
>> chance that a newspaper article was going to have a negative impact on some
>> corporation's contract to buy advertising space, then that article was
>> killed. They gave examples in the TV program.
>>
>> Also, I'm going to tell you there are books, here, on censorship and banned
>> books not to mention "pressure groups" trying all kinds of things to get
>> books, content, etc., out of public libraries and off TV.
>
> Boy do I know this is true. Remember when Karl Rove was president?
Karl Rove was never president, but part of the President's "inner circle."
His grip
> over the media was legend.
He was one of the spinmeisters.
Of course today we don't know even the tiniest
> bit of his abuses.
He got "kinda" fired/pushed out/or invited to leave, or something like
that.
> Hopefully, this will come out as time goes on.
The name you should look up is Scott McClellan (not sure if I got the
spelling right, and can't remember the title, either) but his book just
came out all very much blasting Bush & Crooks.
Another one (I have it but have not read it yet): "When Presidents Lie--A
history of official deception and its consequences" by Eric Alterman. I
did look at the large number of references which give it lots of
credibility.
There's no
> question that when wealthy corporations back you, you will hold some sway
> with the media
Please,....the wealthy corporations back themselves with advertising,
lobbying, PR spin, and lots of propaganda.
> Karl is runing for office again, and he probably has the same backing this
> time around although in light of the current economic problems, who knows who
> is shoring up his concerns or who it is that can afford him anymore.
>
> I'm also aware of the pressure groups trying to get books out of libraries.
> However these groups are exercising free speech. All these v chips and
> parental chips are good examples of this. Parental advisory stickers
> another. TV stations must be responsive to FCC rules. Sometimes these
> interest groups overreach but thankfully we have an alternative press,
> bloggers and so on.
Ever hear of the NSA? CIA? And, ChoicePoint (among others)?
> None of this can thrive in Russia. When the government says no, it's no.
> Access to alternatives there are just not existent.
Their government is much like just one big corporation.
>>> part of the world. I have been learning that history since I have been a
>>> little kid.
>>
>> I have been learning, for the last 10 years, about history all over the
>> world since the beginnings of history, 4,000 years ago,
>>
>
> I have been learning for more time than that of course. Welcome to the club
Actually, I started in the early 1960s, but then, in my career, put the
history aside till some 10 years ago.
>>> And finally, with regard to your analogy about betting on the football
>>> team with the largest guys. Sure, but what if that team never quite
>>> understood what a touchdown is or how you score the game, and every time
>>> they get a touchdown, it's on the wrong side of the field and the points
>>> keep getting racked up for the opponents. Brawn isn't really everything
>>> in that game.
>>
>> Most of the time it is. History shows few exceptions.
>>
>> Then, we need to talk about cheating. I've seen several books on this. One
>> book is about sports: the exact title is-"It ain't cheating if you don't
>> get caught".
>>
>>
>
> Yeah go Patriots and your little video camera on the grassy knoll. lol.
I don't care, one way or the other, about the Patriots.
> Say it ain't so wasn't muttered for the first time by Sara Palin on Thursday.
> The Poor Sox have tumbled so far.
As if I care..
Stray Dog
On Sun, 5 Oct 2008, marika wrote:
> Date: Sun, 5 Oct 2008 10:01:32 -0400
> From: marika <marik...@gmail.com>
> Newsgroups: alt.computer.consultants, alt.politics.economics, sci.econ,
> soc.culture.indian, sci.research.careers,
> alt.usenet.legends.lester-mosley
> Subject: Re: Revisiting "The Dumbest Generation"
>
>
> "Stray Dog" <sdog...@sdf.lonestar.org> wrote in message
> news:Pine.NEB.4.64.08...@sdf.lonestar.org...
>>>
>> A factor in eficacy is individual biological variability. There will always
>> be a fraction of the entire population that gets innoculated that will not
>> be protected by the shots. You'll need to read immunology to learn more.
>>
>>
>
> this sounds good
>
> but doesn't explain why his resistance gets worse instead of about the same
As I said, you'll need to read your immunology books.
Michael Coburn
I suppose you were attempting satire, but I remember one of those things
that flat out lied to the kids and told them that until a bill is signed
by the president that the bill was just a bill. That was repeated over
and over in the little song and the "bill" was pictured as being sad
until it was signed and then the "bill" was happy because it was a law.
At totally rightarded view of the government of the United States was put
forth in that song. The president can let the bill sit and it will be
law without his signature and if the president doesn't like the bill and
vetoes it, the Congress can override the veto and the "bill" will become
law in spite of the (P)resident. In this Constitutional Republic the
Congress makes the laws. And the (P)resident must enforce the laws and
when he does not do so he is supposed to be IMPEACHED. And no Congress
can serve its Constitutional purpose if takes "impeachment off the
table".
A little civics lesson for the folks.....
Stray Dog
On Mon, 6 Oct 2008, Michael Coburn wrote:
> Date: 6 Oct 2008 22:16:16 GMT
> From: Michael Coburn <mik...@verizon.net>
> Newsgroups: alt.computer.consultants, alt.politics.economics, sci.econ,
> soc.culture.indian, sci.research.careers,
> alt.usenet.legends.lester-mosley
> Subject: Re: Revisiting "The Dumbest Generation"
>
> On Sun, 05 Oct 2008 10:28:14 -0400, marika wrote:
>
>> "Michael Coburn" <mik...@verizon.net> wrote in message
>> news:gc9ml...@news6.newsguy.com...
>>
>> O come on, every one who was in grade school in the 80s knows. Someone
>> managed to fit some education in between Saturday morning cartoons.
>> Schoolhouse Rock covered how a bill is created, every Saturday. Most
>> people that age I know can sing absolutely all the songs to Schoolhouse
>> Rock. Therefore, I deem them aware and educated.
>
> I suppose you were attempting satire, but I remember one of those things
> that flat out lied to the kids and told them that until a bill is signed
> by the president that the bill was just a bill. That was repeated over
> and over in the little song and the "bill" was pictured as being sad
> until it was signed and then the "bill" was happy because it was a law.
> At totally rightarded view of the government of the United States was put
> forth in that song. The president can let the bill sit and it will be
> law without his signature and if the president doesn't like the bill and
> vetoes it, the Congress can override the veto and the "bill" will become
> law in spite of the (P)resident. In this Constitutional Republic the
> Congress makes the laws. And the (P)resident must enforce the laws and
> when he does not do so he is supposed to be IMPEACHED. And no Congress
> can serve its Constitutional purpose if takes "impeachment off the
> table".
>
> A little civics lesson for the folks.....
>
>
What I would like to see is the possibility of recall for ANY elected
official. And, make it easy to quickly set up the vote, too. Moreover, I'd
like to see a "report card" -- another vote by the people -- on how the
guy did over his term in office and if the guy gets, say, less than 50%
approval, then his pay gets docked. And, if he gets over 90% approval,
then he gets a bonus. Love to see how that would make elected officials
actually function like a deocracy should.
Stray Dog
On Mon, 6 Oct 2008, retro...@comcast.net wrote:
> Date: Mon, 06 Oct 2008 16:01:54 -0700
> From: retro...@comcast.net
> Newsgroups: alt.computer.consultants, alt.politics.economics, sci.econ,
> soc.culture.indian, sci.research.careers,
> alt.usenet.legends.lester-mosley
> Subject: Re: Revisiting "The Dumbest Generation"
>
> On Mon, 6 Oct 2008 22:35:35 +0000, Stray Dog
> <sdog...@sdf.lonestar.org> wrote:
>
>> Moreover, I'd
>> like to see a "report card" -- another vote by the people -- on how the
>> guy did over his term in office and if the guy gets, say, less than 50%
>> approval, then his pay gets docked. And, if he gets over 90% approval,
>> then he gets a bonus. Love to see how that would make elected officials
>> actually function like a deocracy should.
>
> That bonus bit scares me. That makes for short term thinking and Santa
> Claus politics. It's like the CEO bonuses that contributed to this
> melt down.
All of this would have to depend on--as far as I'm concerned anyway--some
kind of open, transparent, national discussion on what needs to be done,
why, how, when, etc. And, the bonus would have to be limited. None of this
$100 million stock option crap and stock grants that CEOs get. And, don't
forget, those CEO bonuses come about through the revolving door
relationship between the CEOs and their boards, who usually operate behind
closed doors. As part of a _democratic_ process, I'd say the debates
should be like town meetings, any questions may be asked, bills (before
they become laws) are passed out either over the internet, or published in
newspapers, etc.
Yeah, you could argue that people might just vote taxes out of existence
and govt would therefore collapse, and less wise and less educated people
will vote selfishly...but I'd like to see it tried out. I think the bigger
mistake is in letting small numbers of very priviledged and very
rich/powerful people make all of the decisions, behind closed doors, that
affect all of everyone else.
And, guys that screw up in office (i.e. corruption) would have an
additional incentive to behave themselves if they would know their names
really become mud if they screw up (eg. Abramoff scam, Elliot Spitzer and
"sex-gate", etc., etc). Or..at least I'd like to try that one out for a
while and see how it works.
My two cents, FWIW.
Michael Coburn
In the original design Madison brought to Philadelphia, the
representatives of the people in the House of Representatives could not
stand for re-election and could not be returned to the House for some
(unspecified) period. And they were, in fact, subject to recall.
The Senate was elected by the House members from candidates appointed by
the state legislatures and was to be an assembly smaller than the House.
Then both branches of the legislature elected the (P)resident. To serve
for 7 years and the (P)resident could not be re-elected.
I prefer much smaller electoral districts in which the representatives
can be much more easily replaced for their failure to comport themselves
with due regard to for the wishes of their constituents. I am certain
that this is the only real necessity.
Consider that the committee structure of the House is a defacto "senate"
within the larger House of Representatives or a defacto "House of
Representatives" within the better informed world of a MUCH LARGER HOUSE
of Representatives. We do not "elect" the Speaker of The House or the
Chairpersons of the Committees.
Stray Dog
On Tue, 7 Oct 2008, Michael Coburn wrote:
> Date: 7 Oct 2008 05:05:14 GMT
> From: Michael Coburn <mik...@verizon.net>
> Newsgroups: alt.computer.consultants, alt.politics.economics, sci.econ,
> soc.culture.indian, sci.research.careers,
> alt.usenet.legends.lester-mosley
> Subject: Re: Revisiting "The Dumbest Generation"
>
I appreciate your further details, but there are also a whole hell of a
lot of very powerful people who drag their own agendas into our lives and
we have zero control over that process.
I'm affraid that the status quo is basically that we underlings are still
destined to (mostly) grovel and enjoy to whatever effect it may enable us,
our freedom of speech, which is also slowly being eroded by new rules,
lawyers, and spin-meisters (Think: Valerie Plame).
Michael Coburn
Quit whining....
Help in the effort to fix the problems. Demand that any individual
attempting to unseat a current member of Congress be vocal about doubling
the membership of the House of Representatives and reinstating the
"Reapportionment act 0f 1911". And then be very supportive of that
challenger.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reapportionment_Act_of_1929
This was the nail in the coffin of adequate representation.
Stray Dog
On Tue, 7 Oct 2008, Michael Coburn wrote:
> Date: 7 Oct 2008 18:22:21 GMT
I'll be glad to forward to you all of the email in my inbox and my
snailmail box asking me to help in the effort to fix all kinds of world
problems of profound significance.
///////////////////////////////////
Rod Speed
Pathetically niave. Too easy to manipulate.
Rod Speed
> On Mon, 6 Oct 2008, retro...@comcast.net wrote:
>
>> Date: Mon, 06 Oct 2008 16:01:54 -0700
>> From: retro...@comcast.net
>> Newsgroups: alt.computer.consultants, alt.politics.economics,
>> sci.econ, soc.culture.indian, sci.research.careers,
>> alt.usenet.legends.lester-mosley
>> Subject: Re: Revisiting "The Dumbest Generation"
>>
>> On Mon, 6 Oct 2008 22:35:35 +0000, Stray Dog
>> <sdog...@sdf.lonestar.org> wrote:
>>
>>> Moreover, I'd
>>> like to see a "report card" -- another vote by the people -- on how
>>> the guy did over his term in office and if the guy gets, say, less
>>> than 50% approval, then his pay gets docked. And, if he gets over
>>> 90% approval, then he gets a bonus. Love to see how that would make
>>> elected officials actually function like a deocracy should.
>>
>> That bonus bit scares me. That makes for short term thinking and
>> Santa Claus politics. It's like the CEO bonuses that contributed to
>> this melt down.
> All of this would have to depend on--as far as I'm concerned anyway--some kind of open, transparent, national
> discussion on what needs to be done, why, how, when, etc.
Have a look at the mindless shit flying around about the bailout to see how that aint gunna fly.
Ditto in spades with taxation.
> And, the bonus would have to be limited. None of this $100 million stock option crap and stock grants that CEOs get.
> And, don't forget, those CEO bonuses come about through the revolving door relationship between the CEOs and their
> boards, who usually operate behind closed doors. As part of a _democratic
> _ process, I'd say the debates should be like town meetings, any questions may be asked, bills (before they become
> laws) are passed out either over the internet, or published in newspapers, etc.
And so few care about that stuff that it would just get hijacked by those who do care.
> Yeah, you could argue that people might just vote taxes out of existence and govt would therefore collapse, and less
> wise and less educated people will vote selfishly...
Yep, thats precisely what would happen.
> but I'd like to see it tried out.
More fool you.
> I think the bigger mistake is in letting small numbers of very
> priviledged and very rich/powerful people make all of the decisions, behind closed doors, that affect all of everyone
> else.
Whats better about the same thing being done publicly ?
> And, guys that screw up in office (i.e. corruption) would have an
> additional incentive to behave themselves if they would know their
> names really become mud if they screw up (eg. Abramoff scam, Elliot Spitzer and "sex-gate", etc., etc). Or..at least
> I'd like to try that one out for a while and see how it works.
> My two cents, FWIW.
I wanna refund.
Michael Coburn
I do not want your money. I simply want YOU to do what is right when the
opportunity arises and to actively LOOK for the opportunity by being
involved locally.
(David P.)
> Stray Dog <sdog2...@sdf.lonestar.org> wrote:
>
> > What I'd like to see is the possibility of recall for
> > ANY elected official. And, make it easy to quickly
> > "report card" -- another vote by the people -- on
> > gets, say, less than 50% approval, then his pay
> > gets docked. And, if he gets over 90% approval,
> > elected officials function like a democracy should.
>
> Pathetically naive. Too easy to manipulate.
You got _that_ one right, Old Man!
.
.
--
Stray Dog
See below...
On Tue, 7 Oct 2008, Michael Coburn wrote:
> Date: 7 Oct 2008 20:40:06 GMT
> From: Michael Coburn <mik...@verizon.net>
> Newsgroups: alt.computer.consultants, alt.politics.economics, sci.econ,
> soc.culture.indian, sci.research.careers,
> alt.usenet.legends.lester-mosley
> Subject: Re: Revisiting "The Dumbest Generation"
>
> On Tue, 07 Oct 2008 19:38:14 +0000, Stray Dog wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 7 Oct 2008, Michael Coburn wrote:
>>
>>> Date: 7 Oct 2008 18:22:21 GMT
deleted
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> I appreciate your further details, but there are also a whole hell of
>>>> a lot of very powerful people who drag their own agendas into our
>>>> lives and we have zero control over that process.
>>>>
>>>> I'm affraid that the status quo is basically that we underlings are
>>>> still destined to (mostly) grovel and enjoy to whatever effect it may
>>>> enable us, our freedom of speech, which is also slowly being eroded by
>>>> new rules, lawyers, and spin-meisters (Think: Valerie Plame).
>>>
>>> Quit whining....
>>>
>>> Help in the effort to fix the problems.
>>
>> I'll be glad to forward to you all of the email in my inbox and my
>> snailmail box asking me to help in the effort to fix all kinds of world
>> problems of profound significance.
>>
>> ///////////////////////////////////
>> Demand that any individual
>>> attempting to unseat a current member of Congress be vocal about
>>> doubling the membership of the House of Representatives and reinstating
>>> the "Reapportionment act 0f 1911". And then be very supportive of that
>>> challenger.
>>>
>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reapportionment_Act_of_1929
>>>
>>> This was the nail in the coffin of adequate representation.
>>>
>
> I do not want your money. I simply want YOU to do what is right when the
> opportunity arises and to actively LOOK for the opportunity by being
> involved locally.
Michael, let me be frank about what is possible/impossible on newsgroups
and among human beings in society. I've had endless debates invoving never
ending arguments with nearly infinite numbers of people about "what is
right." I have watched, quite helplessly, large numbers of people stumble
along, bumble their way, and muddle through all kinds of things.
1. "What is right" depends on who you ask, how you ask, and when you ask.
2. For N people that you ask, there will be at least N opinions, all over
the spectrum, and sometimes more than N opinions, about "what is right"?
3. I spent 10+ years on one of these ngs trying to get scientists together
to form an advocacy group for and by scientists, to look out for
themselves and on the basis that science, as an activity, is a socially
redeeming function of benefit to society. I failed at this goal. However,
the robber-barron CEOs and rich people all very easily get together and
form lobbying groups and participate in well coordinated large
scale efforts to redistribute the wealth from the poor to the rich and
this process has been very successful and it is easy to find data to prove
it.
4. The best use of newsgroups is for entertainment: of oneself, and others
of kindred spirits.
5. You should google for Godwin's Law and read carefully.
I wish you luck and success in life.
Michael Coburn
Let me be equally frank in telling you that I have absolutely no need for
your sage advise or anyone's sage advice on a word/topic as encompassing
as the one you've chosen.
Here comes the supposed qualifications:
> I've had endless debates invoving
> never ending arguments with nearly infinite numbers of people about
> "what is right." I have watched, quite helplessly, large numbers of
> people stumble along, bumble their way, and muddle through all kinds of
> things.
Again, as always, no real thought; just reaction and proclamation.
> 1. "What is right" depends on who you ask, how you ask, and when you
> ask.
>
> 2. For N people that you ask, there will be at least N opinions, all
> over the spectrum, and sometimes more than N opinions, about "what is
> right"?
>
> 3. I spent 10+ years on one of these ngs trying to get scientists
> together to form an advocacy group for and by scientists, to look out
> for themselves and on the basis that science, as an activity, is a
> socially redeeming function of benefit to society. I failed at this
> goal. However, the robber-barron CEOs and rich people all very easily
> get together and form lobbying groups and participate in well
> coordinated large scale efforts to redistribute the wealth from the poor
> to the rich and this process has been very successful and it is easy to
> find data to prove it.
WHiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiinnnnnnneeeeeeeeeeeeeeee...........
> 4. The best use of newsgroups is for entertainment: of oneself, and
> others of kindred spirits.
>
> 5. You should google for Godwin's Law and read carefully.
>
> I wish you luck and success in life.
Dear Mr. Stray Dog
I have a news flash for you:
"right" is what the vast majority say it is. This is an accurate though
not context free statement. It is not context free because it does not
scale. What is "right" by simple vote of a community can easily conflict
with a more encompassing opinion. And "righteousness" in Tel Aviv is not
the same as it is in Tehran. The actual reason for sovereignty is
differing consensus concerning what is "right". Sovereignty allows
people who share the same values to occupy a region where others can be
expected to conduct themselves in a fashion that is the custom of the
group. Very clear divergences in the definition of "right" can be caused
by differing religious sentiment.
So as I have said. I do not need any input on what "right" _IS_.
However:
If "right" is the consensus then representative democracy is as close as
we can come to righteousness. Your analogy with a "sovereign" group of
scientist or with a sovereign group of welders is poor but somewhat
similar. It is a poor analogy because I suspect the intent was to create
a privileged group that would seek special treatment. OTOH groups do not
normally seek true sovereignty for any reason other than to associate
with people of like mind concerning interrelationships with others in the
same sovereignty, i.e. to rid themselves of those who will not comport
themselves with due regard for accepted morality (Morality is from the
Latin - Moralis which, in fact, means "of manner and custom").
So when I say to do what is "right" I am speaking within the context of
our "supposed" society that is sold to us every day by the, so called,
leaders as being a "democracy". Most of us understand that this term is
an abbreviation for "representative democracy" and that it really speaks
of the broader concept of representative government. And so my own
concept of righteousness is linked up rather tightly with the notion of
consensus of the people and a government that actually manifests that
consensus.
When only 27% of the people believe the bailout to be the right way to
fix a problem and government does the bailout anyway then we do not have
what is "right". And some of us have asked why this is as it is (and it
has been this way since about the 1950's) and we will try to find actual
structural changes that have created the problem and adjustments that
will render our government more suited to its purpose. Others will just
whine. You seem to fit into the latter group. You read too many whinery
books and believe that your increasing awareness of the wrongdoings of
our government is somehow helpful. It isn't. We are already aware of
the problem and more of the same pointing of fingers and whining is
unneeded. Join the effort to actually define and fix broken government
STRUCTURE(S) of government or button it.
Many people erringly but honestly believe that campaign finance reform is
a valid approach to repairing the unrepresentative nature of our
government. I do not believe this for two reasons:
1. There is no way we can have "free speech" -- the right to shout ones
opinions while standing on a soap box or by using mass media to deliver
these opinions to a national audience.
2. The current members of the Congress do not want to endanger the
system that assures their continued incomes and perks, and any "campaign
finance reform" instituted by them that would do any good will have
endangered their continued existence in their stations. In the last
attempt at this the portion of reform that was of value was done in the
full knowledge that the Supremes would strike it.
CFR is a diversion and a side show that will simply take up well intended
resources and produce little of anything positive.
Stray Dog
On Wed, 8 Oct 2008, Michael Coburn wrote:
> Date: 8 Oct 2008 16:08:55 GMT
> From: Michael Coburn <mik...@verizon.net>
>
>> 4. The best use of newsgroups is for entertainment: of oneself, and
>> others of kindred spirits.
>>
>> 5. You should google for Godwin's Law and read carefully.
>>
>> I wish you luck and success in life.
>
> Dear Mr. Stray Dog
>
> I have a news flash for you:
>
> "right" is what the vast majority say it is.
If you get a "vast majority" to agree on something, all you have is a
consensus and not a determination of what is right. The vast majority of
Germans in Naxi Germany just obediently went along with Hitler and in my
book that is not "right."
This is an accurate though
> not context free statement. It is not context free because it does not
> scale. What is "right" by simple vote of a community can easily conflict
> with a more encompassing opinion. And "righteousness" in Tel Aviv is not
> the same as it is in Tehran. The actual reason for sovereignty is
> differing consensus concerning what is "right". Sovereignty allows
> people who share the same values to occupy a region where others can be
> expected to conduct themselves in a fashion that is the custom of the
> group. Very clear divergences in the definition of "right" can be caused
> by differing religious sentiment.
>
> So as I have said. I do not need any input on what "right" _IS_.
Then, and including what you said below, you are being not only dogmatic
but setting yourself up as having a monopoly on what is "right" and
judging everything around you in that context.
Good bye.
///////////////////////////
Michael Coburn
> On Wed, 8 Oct 2008, Michael Coburn wrote:
>
>> Date: 8 Oct 2008 16:08:55 GMT
>> From: Michael Coburn <mik...@verizon.net>
>
>
>>> 4. The best use of newsgroups is for entertainment: of oneself, and
>>> others of kindred spirits.
>>>
>>> 5. You should google for Godwin's Law and read carefully.
>>>
>>> I wish you luck and success in life.
>>
>> Dear Mr. Stray Dog
>>
>> I have a news flash for you:
>>
>> "right" is what the vast majority say it is.
>
> If you get a "vast majority" to agree on something, all you have is a
> consensus and not a determination of what is right. The vast majority of
> Germans in Naxi Germany just obediently went along with Hitler and in my
> book that is not "right."
BZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZTTTTTTTTTTTT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1
There is no other "right". The larger majority did not agree with it.
> This is an accurate though
>> not context free statement. It is not context free because it does not
>> scale. What is "right" by simple vote of a community can easily
>> conflict with a more encompassing opinion. And "righteousness" in Tel
>> Aviv is not the same as it is in Tehran. The actual reason for
>> sovereignty is differing consensus concerning what is "right".
>> Sovereignty allows people who share the same values to occupy a region
>> where others can be expected to conduct themselves in a fashion that is
>> the custom of the group. Very clear divergences in the definition of
>> "right" can be caused by differing religious sentiment.
>>
>> So as I have said. I do not need any input on what "right" _IS_.
>
> Then, and including what you said below, you are being not only dogmatic
> but setting yourself up as having a monopoly on what is "right" and
> judging everything around you in that context.
Nice try, liar. I posit that I am certainly _NOT_ in control of what is
"right". But you will continue to believe that "right" is found in a
book somewhere. Any argument you might put forth in disagreement of what
I have posited will be an appeal to the majority.
Stray Dog
Mr. Coburn:
As far as I am concerned, your idea of democracy is located under a veneer
of totalitarianism (yours). I said good bye in the last of my posts and
I'll leave you with my recommendation that you run for office, somewhere,
far away from me.
//////////////////////////////////
On Wed, 8 Oct 2008, Michael Coburn wrote:
> Date: 8 Oct 2008 18:45:19 GMT
> From: Michael Coburn <mik...@verizon.net>
> Newsgroups: alt.computer.consultants, alt.politics.economics, sci.econ,
> soc.culture.indian, sci.research.careers,
> alt.usenet.legends.lester-mosley
> Subject: Re: Revisiting "The Dumbest Generation"
>
Michael Coburn
> Mr. Coburn:
>
> As far as I am concerned, your idea of democracy is located under a
> veneer of totalitarianism (yours). I said good bye in the last of my
> posts and I'll leave you with my recommendation that you run for office,
> somewhere, far away from me.
Mr. Stray Dog:
Bye