The Trump Test by Will Alexander

[Andre Jute]

To stop the usual monkeys making fools of themselves, again, I'll just note up front that Mr Alexander is a person of colour, so by the rules of the RBT and Donkey Party Communists, he's beyond mortal argument. I also remember both George Gilder's The Israel Test* and Robert Sheaffer's Resentment Against Achievement**, the texts that Will Alexander quotes in support of his thesis.
>
The Trump Test
by Will Alexander
https://townhall.com/columnists/willalexander/2023/04/13/the-trump-test-n2621912
>
Mr Alexander is a very pointed commentator, the best kind. Enjoy!
>
Andre Jute
* Which I reviewed on publication for an Israeli paper.
** Which I put on a reading list for a course.
>

[Tom Kunich]

I will not rest until Biden is shown for exactly what he is - a traitopr to the USA.

[Andre Jute]

Gee, funny that: no one wants to discuss meritocracy.
>

[Tom Kunich]

Socialism has become the philosophy of the left. It hurts every one below the top but people like Frank and Scharf don't know and continue to press it as every major company has left California and jobs are all now minimum wage service jobs. Frank loves socialism because he is a pure communist. Scharf is nothing but he can always hope. People that espouse socialism cannot show a single instance of where it has improved the lives of anyone.

[Andre Jute]

I doubt that the clowns on RBT will be let into the nomenclatura when the communists take over in America. They'll be shot immediately as "useful idiots" (Lenin) who might get in the way of the hard men grabbing and consolidating power. It's on page one of the classic communist takeover playbook. -- AJ
>

[Tom Kunich]

You just cannot believe what some person told me - he said that Karl Marx was friend and advisor to Abraham Lincoln and that freeing the slaves was a socialist act! While it is true that Marx was forced to flee Germany and took a job I believe with the Washington Post and had an acquaintance who became an advisor to Lincoln, socialism was nowhere in the act of recognizing the Constitutional rights of theretofore slaves. But I am sure that Krygowski will argue opposite.

[AMuzi]

On 4/16/2023 10:05 AM, Tom Kunich wrote:
> On Saturday, April 15, 2023 at 11:15:05 AM UTC-7, Andre Jute wrote:
>> On Saturday, April 15, 2023 at 3:44:53 PM UTC+1, Tom Kunich wrote:
>>> On Friday, April 14, 2023 at 4:46:51 PM UTC-7, Andre Jute wrote:

>>>> On Thursday, April 13, 2023 at 10:23:06 PM UTC+1, Andre Jute wrote:
>>>>> To stop the usual monkeys making fools of themselves, again, I'll just note up front that Mr Alexander is a person of colour, so by the rules of the RBT and Donkey Party Communists, he's beyond mortal argument. I also remember both George Gilder's The Israel Test* and Robert Sheaffer's Resentment Against Achievement**, the texts that Will Alexander quotes in support of his thesis.
>>>>>>
>>>>> The Trump Test
>>>>> by Will Alexander
>>>>> https://townhall.com/columnists/willalexander/2023/04/13/the-trump-test-n2621912
>>>>>>
>>>>> Mr Alexander is a very pointed commentator, the best kind. Enjoy!
>>>>>>
>>>>> Andre Jute
>>>>> * Which I reviewed on publication for an Israeli paper.
>>>>> ** Which I put on a reading list for a course.
>>>>>>
>>>> Gee, funny that: no one wants to discuss meritocracy.
>>>>>
>>> Socialism has become the philosophy of the left. It hurts every one below the top but people like Frank and Scharf don't know and continue to press it as every major company has left California and jobs are all now minimum wage service jobs. Frank loves socialism because he is a pure communist. Scharf is nothing but he can always hope. People that espouse socialism cannot show a single instance of where it has improved the lives of anyone.
>>>
>> I doubt that the clowns on RBT will be let into the nomenclatura when the communists take over in America. They'll be shot immediately as "useful idiots" (Lenin) who might get in the way of the hard men grabbing and consolidating power. It's on page one of the classic communist takeover playbook. -- AJ
>>>
>
> You just cannot believe what some person told me - he said that Karl Marx was friend and advisor to Abraham Lincoln and that freeing the slaves was a socialist act! While it is true that Marx was forced to flee Germany and took a job I believe with the Washington Post and had an acquaintance who became an advisor to Lincoln, socialism was nowhere in the act of recognizing the Constitutional rights of theretofore slaves. But I am sure that Krygowski will argue opposite.
>

Karl Marx lived and wrote in London where he wrote for,
among other publications, the New York Daily Tribune for
several years just prior to The War Between The States.

Mr Lincoln read widely including Marx's newspaper items.
That's the extent of any (fanciful) connection.

--
Andrew Muzi
<www.yellowjersey.org/>
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

[Tom Kunich]

Thanks, so if Marx was writing in London there is very little chance he had any effect on Lincoln since he was also a wild anti-colonialist.

[AMuzi]

On 4/16/2023 1:32 PM, Tom Kunich wrote:

> On Sunday, April 16, 2023 at 9:40:43 AM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
>> On 4/16/2023 10:05 AM, Tom Kunich wrote:

>>> On Saturday, April 15, 2023 at 11:15:05 AM UTC-7, Andre Jute wrote:
>>>> On Saturday, April 15, 2023 at 3:44:53 PM UTC+1, Tom Kunich wrote:
>>>>> On Friday, April 14, 2023 at 4:46:51 PM UTC-7, Andre Jute wrote:

>>>>>> On Thursday, April 13, 2023 at 10:23:06 PM UTC+1, Andre Jute wrote:
>>>>>>> To stop the usual monkeys making fools of themselves, again, I'll just note up front that Mr Alexander is a person of colour, so by the rules of the RBT and Donkey Party Communists, he's beyond mortal argument. I also remember both George Gilder's The Israel Test* and Robert Sheaffer's Resentment Against Achievement**, the texts that Will Alexander quotes in support of his thesis.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The Trump Test
>>>>>>> by Will Alexander
>>>>>>> https://townhall.com/columnists/willalexander/2023/04/13/the-trump-test-n2621912
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Mr Alexander is a very pointed commentator, the best kind. Enjoy!
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Andre Jute
>>>>>>> * Which I reviewed on publication for an Israeli paper.
>>>>>>> ** Which I put on a reading list for a course.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Gee, funny that: no one wants to discuss meritocracy.
>>>>>>>
>>>>> Socialism has become the philosophy of the left. It hurts every one below the top but people like Frank and Scharf don't know and continue to press it as every major company has left California and jobs are all now minimum wage service jobs. Frank loves socialism because he is a pure communist. Scharf is nothing but he can always hope. People that espouse socialism cannot show a single instance of where it has improved the lives of anyone.
>>>>>
>>>> I doubt that the clowns on RBT will be let into the nomenclatura when the communists take over in America. They'll be shot immediately as "useful idiots" (Lenin) who might get in the way of the hard men grabbing and consolidating power. It's on page one of the classic communist takeover playbook. -- AJ
>>>>>
>>>
>>> You just cannot believe what some person told me - he said that Karl Marx was friend and advisor to Abraham Lincoln and that freeing the slaves was a socialist act! While it is true that Marx was forced to flee Germany and took a job I believe with the Washington Post and had an acquaintance who became an advisor to Lincoln, socialism was nowhere in the act of recognizing the Constitutional rights of theretofore slaves. But I am sure that Krygowski will argue opposite.
>>>
>> Karl Marx lived and wrote in London where he wrote for,
>> among other publications, the New York Daily Tribune for
>> several years just prior to The War Between The States.
>>
>> Mr Lincoln read widely including Marx's newspaper items.
>> That's the extent of any (fanciful) connection.
>>

> Thanks, so if Marx was writing in London there is very little chance he had any effect on Lincoln since he was also a wild anti-colonialist.
>

WTF?

Merely reading another man's newspaper items does not imply
a "friend and advisor" relationship.

I read that SOB Paul Krugman's tripe for years and I still
despise that lying contorting SOB.

[Andre Jute]

America had a lucky escape. Marx, exiled from Germany, wanted to settle in the United States but only had enough money to move his family to London... -- AJ
>

[Andre Jute]

In saner times, someone would long since have certified Krugman and incarcerated him among the reincarnations of Napoleon and Cleopatra. -- AJ
>

[Catrike Rider]

On Sun, 16 Apr 2023 15:24:47 -0500, AMuzi <a...@yellowjersey.org> wrote:

>On 4/16/2023 1:32 PM, Tom Kunich wrote:

>> On Sunday, April 16, 2023 at 9:40:43 AM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
>>> On 4/16/2023 10:05 AM, Tom Kunich wrote:

>>>> On Saturday, April 15, 2023 at 11:15:05 AM UTC-7, Andre Jute wrote:
>>>>> On Saturday, April 15, 2023 at 3:44:53 PM UTC+1, Tom Kunich wrote:
>>>>>> On Friday, April 14, 2023 at 4:46:51 PM UTC-7, Andre Jute wrote:

>>>>>>> On Thursday, April 13, 2023 at 10:23:06 PM UTC+1, Andre Jute wrote:
>>>>>>>> To stop the usual monkeys making fools of themselves, again, I'll just note up front that Mr Alexander is a person of colour, so by the rules of the RBT and Donkey Party Communists, he's beyond mortal argument. I also remember both George Gilder's The Israel Test* and Robert Sheaffer's Resentment Against Achievement**, the texts that Will Alexander quotes in support of his thesis.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The Trump Test
>>>>>>>> by Will Alexander
>>>>>>>> https://townhall.com/columnists/willalexander/2023/04/13/the-trump-test-n2621912
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Mr Alexander is a very pointed commentator, the best kind. Enjoy!
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Andre Jute
>>>>>>>> * Which I reviewed on publication for an Israeli paper.
>>>>>>>> ** Which I put on a reading list for a course.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Gee, funny that: no one wants to discuss meritocracy.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Socialism has become the philosophy of the left. It hurts every one below the top but people like Frank and Scharf don't know and continue to press it as every major company has left California and jobs are all now minimum wage service jobs. Frank loves socialism because he is a pure communist. Scharf is nothing but he can always hope. People that espouse socialism cannot show a single instance of where it has improved the lives of anyone.
>>>>>>
>>>>> I doubt that the clowns on RBT will be let into the nomenclatura when the communists take over in America. They'll be shot immediately as "useful idiots" (Lenin) who might get in the way of the hard men grabbing and consolidating power. It's on page one of the classic communist takeover playbook. -- AJ
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> You just cannot believe what some person told me - he said that Karl Marx was friend and advisor to Abraham Lincoln and that freeing the slaves was a socialist act! While it is true that Marx was forced to flee Germany and took a job I believe with the Washington Post and had an acquaintance who became an advisor to Lincoln, socialism was nowhere in the act of recognizing the Constitutional rights of theretofore slaves. But I am sure that Krygowski will argue opposite.
>>>>
>>> Karl Marx lived and wrote in London where he wrote for,
>>> among other publications, the New York Daily Tribune for
>>> several years just prior to The War Between The States.
>>>
>>> Mr Lincoln read widely including Marx's newspaper items.
>>> That's the extent of any (fanciful) connection.
>>>
>
>> Thanks, so if Marx was writing in London there is very little chance he had any effect on Lincoln since he was also a wild anti-colonialist.
>>
>
>WTF?
>
>Merely reading another man's newspaper items does not imply
>a "friend and advisor" relationship.
>
>I read that SOB Paul Krugman's tripe for years and I still
>despise that lying contorting SOB.

Whenever I come read or hear a wild-eyed collectivist like Krugman, I
wonder a bit if he himself is willing to become a worker bee himself,
or if he believes he can become the queen. Generally, I believe the
latter. Nobody with a half a wit, especially those with wealth and
status, wants to be a worker bee.

[Tom Kunich]

Krugman is a hero next to that stupid sack of shit Janet Yellen. At least she finally admitted she was wrong but that won't change her insane economic policies.

[Tom Kunich]

I wonder why they didn't pass 6th grade economics.

[Frank Krygowski]

On 4/16/2023 6:19 PM, Catrike Rider wrote:
>
> Whenever I come read or hear a wild-eyed collectivist like Krugman...

Today's reading at church, in part:

"First reading from the Book of the Acts of the Apostles
Acts 2,42-47

"They devoted themselves
to the teaching of the apostles and to the communal life,
to the breaking of bread and to the prayers.
Awe came upon everyone,
and many wonders and signs were done through the apostles.
All who believed were together and had all things in common;
they would sell their property and possessions
and divide them among all according to each one’s need."

Damned commies!

--
- Frank Krygowski

[Andre Jute]

So at last you get something right, Franki-boy, though the bit you leave out is interesting, considering what Tom suspects about you and Flunky:
Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's ass.
>
And right there is the big problem with all socialist systems in a single sentence: they're all driven by envy and resentment except the Christian model, which is why the Donkey Party wants to suppress Christianity, because it makes you look like hypocrites.
>
Unsigned for the usual reasons.
>

[Catrike Rider]

<LOL> So Mathematically ignorant Krygowski is a collectivist because
he read it in the Bible...


But seriously, I don't oppose collectivism if it's by choice, and it's
the only way to raise a family. I do oppose it when it's forced on us
by the government... which is what Paul Krugman and his ilk want to
do.

Acccording to Krugman, the government should force us to do what they
say is good for society, in contradiction to our own self interest.

[AMuzi]

> and divide them among all according to each one’s need."
>
> Damned commies!
>

Willing charity, gifts or sharing are fundamentally
different from compulsion, expropriation and subjugation.

[AMuzi]

Or as Friedman noted frequently, "Who decides?".

[Tom Kunich]

Can you believe that the love couple - Flunky and Krygowski would quote the Bible as if we couldn't tell the difference between charity and the excesses of communism with the top people rich beyond all desires and the common folk allotted whatever might be left. This is clearly the communist ideals of Frank and Flunky. They both believe that in a communist government they would be top dogs because "We is educated" Strange that one of the first things that Communist leaders do is to kill all of the "educated" but then whoever said that that son of a bitch Frank ever actually bothered to study what he preaches.

[funkma...@hotmail.com]

Sure, because a stable society is in no ones best interest....

[funkma...@hotmail.com]

On Monday, April 17, 2023 at 2:19:30 AM UTC-4, the arrogant ignorant fake-irish troll sharted:

> On Monday, April 17, 2023 at 3:38:36 AM UTC+1, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> > On 4/16/2023 6:19 PM, Catrike Rider wrote:
> > >
> > > Whenever I come read or hear a wild-eyed collectivist like Krugman...
> >
> > Today's reading at church, in part:
> >
> > "First reading from the Book of the Acts of the Apostles
> > Acts 2,42-47
> >
> > "They devoted themselves
> > to the teaching of the apostles and to the communal life,
> > to the breaking of bread and to the prayers.
> > Awe came upon everyone,
> > and many wonders and signs were done through the apostles.
> > All who believed were together and had all things in common;
> > they would sell their property and possessions
> > and divide them among all according to each one’s need."
> >
> > Damned commies!
> >
> > --
> > - Frank Krygowski
> >
> So at last you get something right, Franki-boy, though the bit you leave out is interesting, considering what Tom suspects about you and Flunky:
> Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's ass.

and leave it to the arrogant ignorant troll to turn an old testament commandment into a perversion.

> >
> And right there is the big problem with all socialist systems in a single sentence: they're all driven by envy and resentment except the Christian model, which is why the Donkey Party wants to suppress Christianity, because it makes you look like hypocrites.

And right there is the glaring hypocrisy of dakota in full-view - claiming the Democratic party is anti-christian while a mere two lines before making a sexual joke about a commandment. Shut the fuck up dakota.

> >
> U̶n̶s̶i̶g̶n̶e̶d̶ ̶f̶o̶r̶ ̶t̶h̶e̶ ̶u̶s̶u̶a̶l̶ ̶r̶e̶a̶s̶o̶n̶s̶.̶ ̶
> andre/dakota/andrew. a writer of vanity novels and diarrhea-mouthed, long winded poster to the Usenet - where he pretends to be famous.
> >

[funkma...@hotmail.com]

On Monday, April 17, 2023 at 10:45:25 AM UTC-4, Tom Kunich wrote:
>
> Can you believe that the love couple -

jutelist#1. Repeatedly accusing people of being "queer". He's a closeted queer, afraid people will find out.

> Flunky and Krygowski would quote the Bible

Where did I do that, you pathetic piece of shit?

> as if we couldn't tell the difference between charity and the excesses of communism with the top people rich beyond all desires and the common folk allotted whatever might be left.

gibberish - as usual.

> This is clearly the communist ideals of Frank and Flunky. They both believe that in a communist government they would be top dogs because "We is educated".

That's funny coming from high-school dropout.

> Strange that one of the first things that Communist leaders do is to kill all of the "educated" but then whoever said that that son of a bitch Frank ever actually bothered to study what he preaches.

Funny how you then have such disdain for those with higher education - seems to me you're the one always bragging about "look how educated i is! i read all books in twee liberries!". Ya might want to have troll boy fix your grammar in that last sentence, mr articklate poly maths.

[Catrike Rider]

On Mon, 17 Apr 2023 12:35:51 -0700 (PDT), "funkma...@hotmail.com"
<funkma...@hotmail.com> wrote:

You mean a "stable society" with all the little workers doing what
their told to do, sharing their pot of porridge, holding hands and
singing kumbayah? No thanks.

Self interest is what put human beings on the top of the food chain.
I'm going that route.

[AMuzi]

On 4/17/2023 2:35 PM, funkma...@hotmail.com wrote:

> On Monday, April 17, 2023 at 3:43:29 AM UTC-4, floriduh white trash wrote:
>> On Sun, 16 Apr 2023 22:38:30 -0400, Frank Krygowski
>> <frkr...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>
>>> On 4/16/2023 6:19 PM, Catrike Rider wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Whenever I come read or hear a wild-eyed collectivist like Krugman...
>>>
>>> Today's reading at church, in part:
>>>
>>> "First reading from the Book of the Acts of the Apostles
>>> Acts 2,42-47
>>>
>>> "They devoted themselves
>>> to the teaching of the apostles and to the communal life,
>>> to the breaking of bread and to the prayers.
>>> Awe came upon everyone,
>>> and many wonders and signs were done through the apostles.
>>> All who believed were together and had all things in common;
>>> they would sell their property and possessions

>>> and divide them among all according to each one’s need."

>>>
>>> Damned commies!
>> <LOL> So Mathematically ignorant Krygowski is a collectivist because
>> he read it in the Bible...
>>
>>
>> But seriously, I don't oppose collectivism if it's by choice, and it's
>> the only way to raise a family. I do oppose it when it's forced on us
>> by the government... which is what Paul Krugman and his ilk want to
>> do.
>>
>> Acccording to Krugman, the government should force us to do what they
>> say is good for society, in contradiction to our own self interest.
>
> Sure, because a stable society is in no ones best interest....
>

North Korea is very stable.

Stability is a quality unrelated to any issues raised upthread.

[Tom Kunich]

How do you suppose that Flunky is tells us he is an engineer and yet he cannot understand basic engineering? After crying that I wasn't an engineer he could not even understand the basic design of the program I wrote for a water leak detector! Flunky is really stupid and believes himself really clever because they gave him a degree that means nothing except the company he works for can advertise that everything is signed off on by their "engineer". I fired PhD's because they only knew their specialty and nothing more. They did not have the actual training to LEARN anything new successfully.

Flunky pictures socialism as he the one sitting behind the desk and everyone else saying "Please sir, can I have some more?"

[Tom Kunich]

Flunky is so inte4rested in a stable society he loves what Joe Biden is doing to this nation. And her plans on voting for Gavin Loathsome that who destroyed San Franc9isco and now has destroyed California. He is such a stable politician that he turned a $100 Billion surplus into a $23 Billion deficit. The California public employees retirement system is now at great risk and the Democrats no longer HAVE the billionaires to tax into bankruptcy. They all voted with their feet and they have left. While Janet Yellen's inflation is going wild the Democrats claim that the everyday needs of citizens are not worthy of being in the inflation index and then say that yearly inflation under Gavin Loathsome and Biden has only been 8 1/2% yearly (ONLY?).

Since Krygowski claims to have mathematical skills - tell us Frank, what is 3 years of 8.5% inflation?

[funkma...@hotmail.com]

not really

>
> Stability is a quality unrelated to any issues raised upthread.

Things that are for the good of society inherently contribute to the stability of society

[funkma...@hotmail.com]

No, I mean a stable society where someone doesn't have to be so afraid to ride a tricycle on a trail they need to carry a gun.

>
> Self interest is what put human beings on the top of the food chain.

pure unadulterated bullshit. Humans became the dominant species on the planet after societal development.

> I'm going that route.

Good, toddle off into the sunset by yourself on your tricycle with your little gun, mr. 'self interest'. you won't be missed.

[funkma...@hotmail.com]

On Monday, April 17, 2023 at 4:51:20 PM UTC-4, Tom Kunich wrote:
>
> How do you suppose that Flunky is tells us he is an engineer and yet he cannot understand basic engineering?

oh, but I do, little man.

> After crying that I wasn't an engineer

I stated you never were an engineer. You're the one crying and stomping your feet that you were one.

> he could not even understand the basic design of the program I wrote for a water leak detector!

I do understand it, and I also understand why it never worked - the part you left out.

> Flunky is really stupid and believes himself really clever because they gave him a degree that means nothing except the company he works for can advertise that everything is signed off on by their "engineer".

You feel free to keep telling yourself that, mr. "PWM is used to test cables " lol

> I fired PhD's because they only knew their specialty and nothing more. They did not have the actual training to LEARN anything new successfully.

You've never fired anyone. Youve never been in a position of authority long enough, and some one in you position would never have had PhDs reporting to them. Simply more fantasy lies of tiny tommy kunich.

> Flunky pictures socialism as he the one sitting behind the desk and everyone else saying "Please sir, can I have some more?"

sure....go watch another cartoon sparky..

[Catrike Rider]

On Mon, 17 Apr 2023 15:26:02 -0700 (PDT), "funkma...@hotmail.com"
<funkma...@hotmail.com> wrote:

>On Monday, April 17, 2023 at 4:46:05?PM UTC-4, AMuzi wrote:
>> On 4/17/2023 2:35 PM, funkma...@hotmail.com wrote:

>> > On Monday, April 17, 2023 at 3:43:29 AM UTC-4, floriduh white trash wrote:
>> >> On Sun, 16 Apr 2023 22:38:30 -0400, Frank Krygowski
>> >> <frkr...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> On 4/16/2023 6:19 PM, Catrike Rider wrote:
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Whenever I come read or hear a wild-eyed collectivist like Krugman...
>> >>>
>> >>> Today's reading at church, in part:
>> >>>
>> >>> "First reading from the Book of the Acts of the Apostles
>> >>> Acts 2,42-47
>> >>>
>> >>> "They devoted themselves
>> >>> to the teaching of the apostles and to the communal life,
>> >>> to the breaking of bread and to the prayers.
>> >>> Awe came upon everyone,
>> >>> and many wonders and signs were done through the apostles.
>> >>> All who believed were together and had all things in common;
>> >>> they would sell their property and possessions

>> >>> and divide them among all according to each one’s need."

>> >>>
>> >>> Damned commies!
>> >> <LOL> So Mathematically ignorant Krygowski is a collectivist because
>> >> he read it in the Bible...
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> But seriously, I don't oppose collectivism if it's by choice, and it's
>> >> the only way to raise a family. I do oppose it when it's forced on us
>> >> by the government... which is what Paul Krugman and his ilk want to
>> >> do.
>> >>
>> >> Acccording to Krugman, the government should force us to do what they
>> >> say is good for society, in contradiction to our own self interest.
>> >
>> > Sure, because a stable society is in no ones best interest....
>> >
>> North Korea is very stable.
>
>not really
>
>>
>> Stability is a quality unrelated to any issues raised upthread.
>
>Things that are for the good of society inherently contribute to the stability of society
>
>> --
>> Andrew Muzi
>> <www.yellowjersey.org/>
>> Open every day since 1 April, 1971

What's "for the good of society" is a subjective evaluation. So is
"the stability of society."

[Catrike Rider]

On Mon, 17 Apr 2023 15:31:54 -0700 (PDT), "funkma...@hotmail.com"
<funkma...@hotmail.com> wrote:

Actually, that situation seems perfectly stable to me right now. I
rode right past where I was attacked a few days ago.

>> Self interest is what put human beings on the top of the food chain.
>
>pure unadulterated bullshit. Humans became the dominant species on the planet after societal development.

Some societal developement has been a result of individuals' self
interest. If it wasn't in the individuals' self interest, they
wouldn't have chosen to do it. It's the societal developement that's
not a choice that's the problem. I hope that doesn't confuse you any
more than your regular state of confusion.

>> I'm going that route.
>
>Good, toddle off into the sunset by yourself on your tricycle with your little gun, mr. 'self interest'. you won't be missed.

Actually, I'm told pretty regularly that I would be missed.

[AMuzi]

On 4/17/2023 5:26 PM, funkma...@hotmail.com wrote:

> On Monday, April 17, 2023 at 4:46:05 PM UTC-4, AMuzi wrote:
>> On 4/17/2023 2:35 PM, funkma...@hotmail.com wrote:

>>> On Monday, April 17, 2023 at 3:43:29 AM UTC-4, floriduh white trash wrote:
>>>> On Sun, 16 Apr 2023 22:38:30 -0400, Frank Krygowski
>>>> <frkr...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 4/16/2023 6:19 PM, Catrike Rider wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Whenever I come read or hear a wild-eyed collectivist like Krugman...
>>>>>
>>>>> Today's reading at church, in part:
>>>>>
>>>>> "First reading from the Book of the Acts of the Apostles
>>>>> Acts 2,42-47
>>>>>
>>>>> "They devoted themselves
>>>>> to the teaching of the apostles and to the communal life,
>>>>> to the breaking of bread and to the prayers.
>>>>> Awe came upon everyone,
>>>>> and many wonders and signs were done through the apostles.
>>>>> All who believed were together and had all things in common;
>>>>> they would sell their property and possessions

>>>>> and divide them among all according to each one’s need."

>>>>>
>>>>> Damned commies!
>>>> <LOL> So Mathematically ignorant Krygowski is a collectivist because
>>>> he read it in the Bible...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> But seriously, I don't oppose collectivism if it's by choice, and it's
>>>> the only way to raise a family. I do oppose it when it's forced on us
>>>> by the government... which is what Paul Krugman and his ilk want to
>>>> do.
>>>>
>>>> Acccording to Krugman, the government should force us to do what they
>>>> say is good for society, in contradiction to our own self interest.
>>>
>>> Sure, because a stable society is in no ones best interest....
>>>
>> North Korea is very stable.
>
> not really
>
>>
>> Stability is a quality unrelated to any issues raised upthread.
>
> Things that are for the good of society inherently contribute to the stability of society
>

First let me stipulate that I'm not advocating stability as
a measure of a desirable society. In fact, the opposite.
Progress is disruptive by its nature and our own wealth and
comfort has been earned by innovation. Human creativity is
the ultimate force for instability, which is good!


You say North Korea's not stable? WTF?

North Korea is so stable it's ossified. Nothing's changed
since 1953! Same NORK crappy clothing made from their own
uniquely crappy NORK synthetic fabric[1], same crappy diet,
supplemented by tree bark[2], same slave labor camps [3],
and still about the same GDP as 1953 too boot! All under
the world's first, best and only Stalinist dynasty- so
stable it's in its uncontested 3d generation which is more
than the Roosevelts or Kennedys can say.

[1]https://www.vaguelyinteresting.co.uk/north-korea-and-the-fabric-of-the-future/

[2]https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2010/07/starving-north-koreans-forced-survive-diet-grass-and-tree-bark/

[3]https://www.hrw.org/news/2021/02/09/un-finds-torture-forced-labor-still-rampant-north-korean-prisons

[Frank Krygowski]

On 4/17/2023 7:33 PM, Catrike Rider wrote:
> On Mon, 17 Apr 2023 15:31:54 -0700 (PDT), "funkma...@hotmail.com"
> <funkma...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>> You mean a "stable society" with all the little workers doing what
>>> their told to do, sharing their pot of porridge, holding hands and
>>> singing kumbayah? No thanks.
>>
>> No, I mean a stable society where someone doesn't have to be so
afraid to ride a tricycle on a trail they need to carry a gun.
>
> Actually, that situation seems perfectly stable to me right now. I
> rode right past where I was attacked a few days ago.

:-) On a bike path that you constructed all on your own, using your own
independent knowledge, supplies and strength? Hardly!

You're riding on a kiddie path paid for by government money, probably in
part with federal dollars (since that's the usual scheme), dollars that
were originally intended for transportation infrastructure.

Those funds were almost certainly justified by dishonestly _pretending_
that the trail would be a transportation corridor, specifically one
whose use would supplant the use of cars. I've seen the paperwork for
such proposals, and that's a standard feature of the application. Isn't
that a socialist motivation?

But as is almost always the case, that justification was
(wink-wink-nod-nod) fiction, because fewer than 1% of the users are
doing anything like practical transportation.

In fact, it's very likely that the trail generated extra motor vehicle
travel - for example, by people so timid about riding on roads that they
load their tricycles into pickup trucks to haul them to the linear park,
then haul them back after just riding back and forth.

But as I've said, it's important to keep moving. If a person is so
feeble and timid that he is willing to pedal only on a tricycle, only
while carrying a gun, on a flat trail paid for by socialism, so be it.
Keep pedaling.

Just don't pretend to be a macho, go-it-alone rugged individualist.

--
- Frank Krygowski

[John B.]

On Sun, 16 Apr 2023 08:05:11 -0700 (PDT), Tom Kunich
<cycl...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Saturday, April 15, 2023 at 11:15:05?AM UTC-7, Andre Jute wrote:
>> On Saturday, April 15, 2023 at 3:44:53?PM UTC+1, Tom Kunich wrote:
>> > On Friday, April 14, 2023 at 4:46:51?PM UTC-7, Andre Jute wrote:

>> > > On Thursday, April 13, 2023 at 10:23:06?PM UTC+1, Andre Jute wrote:
>> > > > To stop the usual monkeys making fools of themselves, again, I'll just note up front that Mr Alexander is a person of colour, so by the rules of the RBT and Donkey Party Communists, he's beyond mortal argument. I also remember both George Gilder's The Israel Test* and Robert Sheaffer's Resentment Against Achievement**, the texts that Will Alexander quotes in support of his thesis.
>> > > > >
>> > > > The Trump Test
>> > > > by Will Alexander
>> > > > https://townhall.com/columnists/willalexander/2023/04/13/the-trump-test-n2621912
>> > > > >
>> > > > Mr Alexander is a very pointed commentator, the best kind. Enjoy!
>> > > > >
>> > > > Andre Jute
>> > > > * Which I reviewed on publication for an Israeli paper.
>> > > > ** Which I put on a reading list for a course.
>> > > > >
>> > > Gee, funny that: no one wants to discuss meritocracy.
>> > > >
>> > Socialism has become the philosophy of the left. It hurts every one below the top but people like Frank and Scharf don't know and continue to press it as every major company has left California and jobs are all now minimum wage service jobs. Frank loves socialism because he is a pure communist. Scharf is nothing but he can always hope. People that espouse socialism cannot show a single instance of where it has improved the lives of anyone.
>> >
>> I doubt that the clowns on RBT will be let into the nomenclatura when the communists take over in America. They'll be shot immediately as "useful idiots" (Lenin) who might get in the way of the hard men grabbing and consolidating power. It's on page one of the classic communist takeover playbook. -- AJ
>> >
>
>You just cannot believe what some person told me - he said that Karl Marx was friend and advisor to Abraham Lincoln and that freeing the slaves was a socialist act! While it is true that Marx was forced to flee Germany and took a job I believe with the Washington Post and had an acquaintance who became an advisor to Lincoln, socialism was nowhere in the act of recognizing the Constitutional rights of theretofore slaves. But I am sure that Krygowski will argue opposite.

Reality is that during the period of the Civil War Karl Marx was the
European correspondent for New York Daily Tribune, from 1852 and
correspondent for the Viennese Die Presse from 1861. Due to cost
reductions the Tribune cancelled his contract in 1862,
--
Cheers,

John B.

[Catrike Rider]

On Mon, 17 Apr 2023 20:31:16 -0400, Frank Krygowski
<frkr...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

>On 4/17/2023 7:33 PM, Catrike Rider wrote:
> > On Mon, 17 Apr 2023 15:31:54 -0700 (PDT), "funkma...@hotmail.com"
> > <funkma...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >>> You mean a "stable society" with all the little workers doing what
> >>> their told to do, sharing their pot of porridge, holding hands and
> >>> singing kumbayah? No thanks.
> >>
> >> No, I mean a stable society where someone doesn't have to be so
>afraid to ride a tricycle on a trail they need to carry a gun.
> >
> > Actually, that situation seems perfectly stable to me right now. I
> > rode right past where I was attacked a few days ago.
>
>:-) On a bike path that you constructed all on your own, using your own
>independent knowledge, supplies and strength? Hardly!

No, the bike trails I ride are have been built by various governments,
using tax revenue collected from their constituents. I know that
troubles you, but I don't care.

>You're riding on a kiddie path paid for by government money, probably in
>part with federal dollars (since that's the usual scheme), dollars that
>were originally intended for transportation infrastructure.

I don't know what the funding for the bike paths was "originally
intended for," neither do you.... But I'm glad that they're being
used to build bike trails.

>Those funds were almost certainly justified by dishonestly _pretending_
>that the trail would be a transportation corridor, specifically one
>whose use would supplant the use of cars.

Assuming "facts" not in evidence.

>I've seen the paperwork for
>such proposals, and that's a standard feature of the application.

No you haven't...

> Isn't
>that a socialist motivation?

Don't you even know what Socialism is, Dummy? Why don't you look it
up so you don't look so stupid?

>But as is almost always the case, that justification was
>(wink-wink-nod-nod) fiction, because fewer than 1% of the users are
>doing anything like practical transportation.

I transported my self over twenty miles on a bike trail, Saturday,
than I turned around and transported myself back to my truck.

>In fact, it's very likely that the trail generated extra motor vehicle
>travel - for example, by people so timid about riding on roads that they
>load their tricycles into pickup trucks to haul them to the linear park,
>then haul them back after just riding back and forth.

Indeed, I drove 45 miles to where I began my ride Saturday, then I
drove 45 miles back home. That you don't approve is insignificant,
other than your complaining is entertaining.

>But as I've said, it's important to keep moving. If a person is so
>feeble and timid that he is willing to pedal only on a tricycle, only
>while carrying a gun, on a flat trail paid for by socialism, so be it.
>Keep pedaling.

Oh, I shall... Pertaining to your use of the term "Socialism," again,
do that look_it up_thing, soon.

>Just don't pretend to be a macho, go-it-alone rugged individualist.

Unlike you, I don't pretend anything. I'm not so rugged anymore, but I
still am an individualist.

[funkma...@hotmail.com]

and yet you're still afraid to ride without your gun.

> >> Self interest is what put human beings on the top of the food chain.
> >
> >pure unadulterated bullshit. Humans became the dominant species on the planet after societal development.
> Some societal developement has been a result of individuals' self
> interest.

pure unadulterated bullshit. It was a crucial aspect of our development as a species, in particular the dominant species on the planet.

> If it wasn't in the individuals' self interest, they
> wouldn't have chosen to do it.

'choice'...sure thing floriduh...

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/238212623_Culture_and_the_Evolution_of_the_Human_Social_Instincts
"cultural evolutionary processes constructed a social environment that caused ordinary natural selection acting on genes to favor empathetic altruism, and a tendency to direct that altruism preferentially to fellow members of symbolically marked groups. These social instincts evolved in the late Pleistocene but the radically new social institutions that have evolved in the Holocene were (and continue to be) both enabled and constrained by them"

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/animal-emotions/201310/the-fairness-instinct-science-human-nature-and-sociality
"[fairness] is not, as is traditionally supposed, a purely ideological issue; it is emotion and behavior rooted in our DNA."

> It's the societal developement that's
> not a choice that's the problem. I hope that doesn't confuse you any
> more than your regular state of confusion.

funny, coming from the one who talks about how stable his environment is while being afraid to experience it with a gun.

> >> I'm going that route.
> >
> >Good, toddle off into the sunset by yourself on your tricycle with your little gun, mr. 'self interest'. you won't be missed.
> Actually, I'm told pretty regularly that I would be missed.

Why do you care, you selfish prick?

[funkma...@hotmail.com]

You and I have very different interpretations of the word 'stable'.

>
>
> You say North Korea's not stable? WTF?
>
> North Korea is so stable it's ossified. Nothing's changed
> since 1953! Same NORK crappy clothing made from their own
> uniquely crappy NORK synthetic fabric[1], same crappy diet,
> supplemented by tree bark[2], same slave labor camps [3],
> and still about the same GDP as 1953 too boot! All under
> the world's first, best and only Stalinist dynasty- so
> stable it's in its uncontested 3d generation which is more
> than the Roosevelts or Kennedys can say.
>
> [1]https://www.vaguelyinteresting.co.uk/north-korea-and-the-fabric-of-the-future/
>
> [2]https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2010/07/starving-north-koreans-forced-survive-diet-grass-and-tree-bark/
>
> [3]https://www.hrw.org/news/2021/02/09/un-finds-torture-forced-labor-still-rampant-north-korean-prisons

And what happens when the Kim family loses control? They aren't a country built upon a system of laws. The US is the oldest functioning system of government on the planet because we are based on the rule of law, not the rule of one family or the rule of some nebulous supernatural entity, so much every first world country has emulated our example (with a few notable exceptions: China of course whose 1st world status can be disputed and Russia where putin is doing his damned to drag them back into totalitarianism).

Progress doesn't mean 'unstable'.

[Catrike Rider]

On Tue, 18 Apr 2023 02:39:23 -0700 (PDT), "funkma...@hotmail.com"
<funkma...@hotmail.com> wrote:

Like I said, people engaged in tribalism out of choice. They
detirmined that it was in their best interest to do so.

>> If it wasn't in the individuals' self interest, they
>> wouldn't have chosen to do it.
>
>'choice'...sure thing floriduh...

Junior thinks that prehistoric humans didn't "choose" to band
together?

>https://www.researchgate.net/publication/238212623_Culture_and_the_Evolution_of_the_Human_Social_Instincts
>"cultural evolutionary processes constructed a social environment that caused ordinary natural selection acting on genes to favor empathetic altruism, and a tendency to direct that altruism preferentially to fellow members of symbolically marked groups. These social instincts evolved in the late Pleistocene but the radically new social institutions that have evolved in the Holocene were (and continue to be) both enabled and constrained by them"

Like I said, humans chose to band together..

>https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/animal-emotions/201310/the-fairness-instinct-science-human-nature-and-sociality
>"[fairness] is not, as is traditionally supposed, a purely ideological issue; it is emotion and behavior rooted in our DNA."

<EYEROLL> nonsense....

>> It's the societal developement that's
>> not a choice that's the problem. I hope that doesn't confuse you any
>> more than your regular state of confusion.
>
>funny, coming from the one who talks about how stable his environment is while being afraid to experience it with a gun.

The gun makes it stable...

>> >> I'm going that route.
>> >
>> >Good, toddle off into the sunset by yourself on your tricycle with your little gun, mr. 'self interest'. you won't be missed.
>> Actually, I'm told pretty regularly that I would be missed.
>
>Why do you care, you selfish prick?

<GRIN>

[John B.]

Re Socialism... I believe that more then 50% of the U.S. budget is
made up of what certainly can be termed socialistic type payments to
the unwashed multitudes (:-)
--
Cheers,

John B.

[John B.]

rOn Tue, 18 Apr 2023 02:48:12 -0700 (PDT), "funkma...@hotmail.com"
<funkma...@hotmail.com> wrote:

>On Monday, April 17, 2023 at 7:37:02?PM UTC-4, AMuzi wrote:
>> On 4/17/2023 5:26 PM, funkma...@hotmail.com wrote:

>> > On Monday, April 17, 2023 at 4:46:05 PM UTC-4, AMuzi wrote:
>> >> On 4/17/2023 2:35 PM, funkma...@hotmail.com wrote:

>> >>> On Monday, April 17, 2023 at 3:43:29 AM UTC-4, floriduh white trash wrote:
>> >>>> On Sun, 16 Apr 2023 22:38:30 -0400, Frank Krygowski
>> >>>> <frkr...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>> >>>>
>> >>>>> On 4/16/2023 6:19 PM, Catrike Rider wrote:
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> Whenever I come read or hear a wild-eyed collectivist like Krugman...
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Today's reading at church, in part:
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> "First reading from the Book of the Acts of the Apostles
>> >>>>> Acts 2,42-47
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> "They devoted themselves
>> >>>>> to the teaching of the apostles and to the communal life,
>> >>>>> to the breaking of bread and to the prayers.
>> >>>>> Awe came upon everyone,
>> >>>>> and many wonders and signs were done through the apostles.
>> >>>>> All who believed were together and had all things in common;
>> >>>>> they would sell their property and possessions

>> >>>>> and divide them among all according to each one’s need."

Are you sure about that? The English have a government based largely
on law, originating with the Magna Carta, signed in 1215, which
established a code of laws for England.

In fact it is said that "It influenced the early American colonists in
the Thirteen Colonies and the formation of the United States
Constitution, which became the supreme law of the land in the new
republic of the United States"

--
Cheers,

John B.

[Catrike Rider]

On Tue, 18 Apr 2023 18:08:33 +0700, John B. <sloc...@gmail.com>
wrote:

IMHO, Socialism is the public (government) ownership and control of
the business world, ie, everybody works for the government. Prices and
wages are set according to need, not value. What you describe is what
I call collectivism, and I do not oppose all forms of collectivism,
not even when a government does it. Indeed, some things are better
done collectively.

[funkma...@hotmail.com]

<eyeroll> nonsense.

> >> If it wasn't in the individuals' self interest, they
> >> wouldn't have chosen to do it.
> >
> >'choice'...sure thing floriduh...
> Junior thinks that prehistoric humans didn't "choose" to band
> together?

kitty thinks they had another choice in order to survive?

> >https://www.researchgate.net/publication/238212623_Culture_and_the_Evolution_of_the_Human_Social_Instincts
> >"cultural evolutionary processes constructed a social environment that caused ordinary natural selection acting on genes to favor empathetic altruism, and a tendency to direct that altruism preferentially to fellow members of symbolically marked groups. These social instincts evolved in the late Pleistocene but the radically new social institutions that have evolved in the Holocene were (and continue to be) both enabled and constrained by them"
> Like I said, humans chose to band together..

lol...kitty thinks instincts are a matter of choice.

> >https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/animal-emotions/201310/the-fairness-instinct-science-human-nature-and-sociality
> >"[fairness] is not, as is traditionally supposed, a purely ideological issue; it is emotion and behavior rooted in our DNA."
> <EYEROLL> nonsense....

lol....Now kitty is more learned and insightful that a PhD evolutionary biologist. Do tell kitty: was your dissertation is some specialty of evolutionary biology?

> >> It's the societal developement that's
> >> not a choice that's the problem. I hope that doesn't confuse you any
> >> more than your regular state of confusion.
> >
> >funny, coming from the one who talks about how stable his environment is while being afraid to experience it with a gun.
> The gun makes it stable...

no, the gun doesn't make it stable, you fucking idiot. If you were to be assaulted on the trail the fact that you were carrying a gun would have little to do with it - you would be assaulted either way. The gun only provides possible different outcomes.

> >> >> I'm going that route.
> >> >
> >> >Good, toddle off into the sunset by yourself on your tricycle with your little gun, mr. 'self interest'. you won't be missed.
> >> Actually, I'm told pretty regularly that I would be missed.
> >
> >Why do you care, you selfish prick?
> <GRIN>

oh yeah...you'll be missed fer sure....

[funkma...@hotmail.com]

Your opinion is duly noted, and dismissed as an ignorant and uninformed opinion.

> Prices and
> wages are set according to need, not value. What you describe is what
> I call collectivism, and I do not oppose all forms of collectivism,
> not even when a government does it. Indeed, some things are better
> done collectively.

What he's describing is _known_ as a social democracy, You can certainly call it whatever you want, it just makes you look more like an idiot.

[Catrike Rider]

On Tue, 18 Apr 2023 04:20:24 -0700 (PDT), "funkma...@hotmail.com"
<funkma...@hotmail.com> wrote:

Ahhh, yes, they exerted their self interest in order to survive. Don't
we all?

>> >https://www.researchgate.net/publication/238212623_Culture_and_the_Evolution_of_the_Human_Social_Instincts
>> >"cultural evolutionary processes constructed a social environment that caused ordinary natural selection acting on genes to favor empathetic altruism, and a tendency to direct that altruism preferentially to fellow members of symbolically marked groups. These social instincts evolved in the late Pleistocene but the radically new social institutions that have evolved in the Holocene were (and continue to be) both enabled and constrained by them"
>> Like I said, humans chose to band together..
>
>lol...kitty thinks instincts are a matter of choice.

Self interest is itelf, instinctive. Some have called it "survival of
the fittest" as coined by Herbert Spenser (SP?), an early libertarian.

>> >https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/animal-emotions/201310/the-fairness-instinct-science-human-nature-and-sociality
>> >"[fairness] is not, as is traditionally supposed, a purely ideological issue; it is emotion and behavior rooted in our DNA."
>> <EYEROLL> nonsense....
>
>lol....Now kitty is more learned and insightful that a PhD evolutionary biologist. Do tell kitty: was your dissertation is some specialty of evolutionary biology?

Like I said elsewhere, I'd need to know what the PhD evolutionary
biologist's agenda is before I put any credence in his opinion. I
respect your freedom to buy onto his opinion, however, I don't.

>> >> It's the societal developement that's
>> >> not a choice that's the problem. I hope that doesn't confuse you any
>> >> more than your regular state of confusion.
>> >
>> >funny, coming from the one who talks about how stable his environment is while being afraid to experience it with a gun.
>> The gun makes it stable...
>
>no, the gun doesn't make it stable, you fucking idiot. If you were to be assaulted on the trail the fact that you were carrying a gun would have little to do with it - you would be assaulted either way.

Not likely, most thugs back off when confronted with a gun. It's in
their self interest to do so.

>The gun only provides possible different outcomes.
>
>> >> >> I'm going that route.
>> >> >
>> >> >Good, toddle off into the sunset by yourself on your tricycle with your little gun, mr. 'self interest'. you won't be missed.
>> >> Actually, I'm told pretty regularly that I would be missed.
>> >
>> >Why do you care, you selfish prick?
>> <GRIN>
>
>oh yeah...you'll be missed fer sure....

Junior calls me selfish, not that I care, yet he doesn't explain what
makes him think I'm selfish.

[Catrike Rider]

On Tue, 18 Apr 2023 04:25:50 -0700 (PDT), "funkma...@hotmail.com"
<funkma...@hotmail.com> wrote:

Well, that's pretty much how Marx described it...

>> Prices and
>> wages are set according to need, not value. What you describe is what
>> I call collectivism, and I do not oppose all forms of collectivism,
>> not even when a government does it. Indeed, some things are better
>> done collectively.
>
>What he's describing is _known_ as a social democracy, You can certainly call it whatever you want, it just makes you look more like an idiot.

social democracy, political ideology that originally advocated a
peaceful evolutionary transition of society from capitalism to
socialism using established political processes.
https://www.britannica.com/topic/social-democracy

[funkma...@hotmail.com]

Yes.

> The English have a government based largely
> on law, originating with the Magna Carta, signed in 1215, which
> established a code of laws for England.

At the time of the American Revolution, England was still for all intents and purposes an absolute monarchy. It wasn't until the Reform Act of 1832 where the power of the monarchy was officially reduced to be largely ceremonial and the representative parliament became the dominant legislative force. The power of the monarchy had been waning before that, but in the 1770's the Kings word was still law.

>
> In fact it is said that "It influenced the early American colonists in
> the Thirteen Colonies and the formation of the United States
> Constitution, which became the supreme law of the land in the new
> republic of the United States"

That's true, it was also influenced by greek democracy and the Roman senate.

>
> --
> Cheers,
>
> John B.

[funkma...@hotmail.com]

No, you selfish prick.

> >> >https://www.researchgate.net/publication/238212623_Culture_and_the_Evolution_of_the_Human_Social_Instincts
> >> >"cultural evolutionary processes constructed a social environment that caused ordinary natural selection acting on genes to favor empathetic altruism, and a tendency to direct that altruism preferentially to fellow members of symbolically marked groups. These social instincts evolved in the late Pleistocene but the radically new social institutions that have evolved in the Holocene were (and continue to be) both enabled and constrained by them"
> >> Like I said, humans chose to band together..
> >
> >lol...kitty thinks instincts are a matter of choice.
> Self interest is itelf, instinctive. Some have called it "survival of
> the fittest" as coined by Herbert Spenser (SP?), an early libertarian.

I didn't say it wasn't. I said humans have a social instinct.

> >> >https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/animal-emotions/201310/the-fairness-instinct-science-human-nature-and-sociality
> >> >"[fairness] is not, as is traditionally supposed, a purely ideological issue; it is emotion and behavior rooted in our DNA."
> >> <EYEROLL> nonsense....
> >
> >lol....Now kitty is more learned and insightful that a PhD evolutionary biologist. Do tell kitty: was your dissertation is some specialty of evolutionary biology?
> Like I said elsewhere, I'd need to know what the PhD evolutionary
> biologist's agenda is before I put any credence in his opinion. I
> respect your freedom to buy onto his opinion, however, I don't.

IOW you have no qualifications on the issue, you just disagree because it goes against your personal bias. IOW - your opinions is asserted in absolute ignorance - glad you finally admit it.

> >> >> It's the societal developement that's
> >> >> not a choice that's the problem. I hope that doesn't confuse you any
> >> >> more than your regular state of confusion.
> >> >
> >> >funny, coming from the one who talks about how stable his environment is while being afraid to experience it with a gun.
> >> The gun makes it stable...
> >
> >no, the gun doesn't make it stable, you fucking idiot. If you were to be assaulted on the trail the fact that you were carrying a gun would have little to do with it - you would be assaulted either way.
> Not likely, most thugs back off when confronted with a gun. It's in
> their self interest to do so.

The assault would still happen either way, the gun just provides different possible outcomes. It's amazing how you delude yourself that your gun somehow gives you magic protection. If someone is going to fuck with you, they're going to fuck with you. The gun only determines the success rate.

> >The gun only provides possible different outcomes.
> >
> >> >> >> I'm going that route.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >Good, toddle off into the sunset by yourself on your tricycle with your little gun, mr. 'self interest'. you won't be missed.
> >> >> Actually, I'm told pretty regularly that I would be missed.
> >> >
> >> >Why do you care, you selfish prick?
> >> <GRIN>
> >
> >oh yeah...you'll be missed fer sure....
> Junior calls me selfish, not that I care, yet he doesn't explain what
> makes him think I'm selfish.

Wow...you still haven' figured out this internet thingie....

"Self interest is what put human beings on the top of the food chain.

I'm going that route. "

fuck off.

[funkma...@hotmail.com]

in your ignorant and uninformed opinion.

> >> Prices and
> >> wages are set according to need, not value. What you describe is what
> >> I call collectivism, and I do not oppose all forms of collectivism,
> >> not even when a government does it. Indeed, some things are better
> >> done collectively.
> >
> >What he's describing is _known_ as a social democracy, You can certainly call it whatever you want, it just makes you look more like an idiot.
> social democracy, political ideology that originally advocated a
> peaceful evolutionary transition of society from capitalism to
> socialism using established political processes.
> https://www.britannica.com/topic/social-democracy

oh looky, kitty learned how to cut-n-paste!

Tell us all baout how horrible it is. Let's look at the hellholes of Japan and South Korea.....The irish trolls beloved Ireland which has one of the strongest social safety systems in the world.....The Nordic Models which consistently rank as the "happiest countries in the world".....Nah - in the kitty myopic world view, anything with "social" in it is just another word for totalitarian dictatorship. There's no way _any_ application of socialist structures could be beneficial to anyone's' self interest (as he rides his tricycle on a publicly funded bike trail, which he got to by driving on publicly funded roads which are ordered by a system of laws enforced by a publicly funded police force - yeah, fuck all that socialism!).

That's our kitty, attempting to define the world in simple single sentences....You might want to try this, dumbass....

Toward the Socialism of the Future, in the Wake of the Demise of the Socialism of the Past
https://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/handle/2027.42/68447/10.1177_048661349202400302.pdf;jsessionid=2F461B509813C24EB3613D5BF85F4305?sequence=2

Economic democracy : the politics of feasible socialism
https://archive.org/details/economicdemocrac0000arch

[Catrike Rider]

On Tue, 18 Apr 2023 05:00:41 -0700 (PDT), "funkma...@hotmail.com"
<funkma...@hotmail.com> wrote:

You have no interest in surviving?

>> >> >https://www.researchgate.net/publication/238212623_Culture_and_the_Evolution_of_the_Human_Social_Instincts
>> >> >"cultural evolutionary processes constructed a social environment that caused ordinary natural selection acting on genes to favor empathetic altruism, and a tendency to direct that altruism preferentially to fellow members of symbolically marked groups. These social instincts evolved in the late Pleistocene but the radically new social institutions that have evolved in the Holocene were (and continue to be) both enabled and constrained by them"
>> >> Like I said, humans chose to band together..
>> >
>> >lol...kitty thinks instincts are a matter of choice.
>> Self interest is itelf, instinctive. Some have called it "survival of
>> the fittest" as coined by Herbert Spenser (SP?), an early libertarian.
>
>I didn't say it wasn't. I said humans have a social instinct.

Some do, some don't. I don't.

>https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/animal-emotions/201310/the-fairness-instinct-science-human-nature-and-sociality
>> >> >"[fairness] is not, as is traditionally supposed, a purely
ideological issue; it is emotion and behavior rooted in our DNA."
>> >> <EYEROLL> nonsense....
>> >
>> >lol....Now kitty is more learned and insightful that a PhD evolutionary biologist. Do tell kitty: was your dissertation is some specialty of evolutionary biology?
>> Like I said elsewhere, I'd need to know what the PhD evolutionary
>> biologist's agenda is before I put any credence in his opinion. I
>> respect your freedom to buy onto his opinion, however, I don't.
>
>IOW you have no qualifications on the issue, you just disagree because it goes against your personal bias. IOW - your opinions is asserted in absolute ignorance - glad you finally admit it.

Leftists tend to believe anybody who supports their own agenda.

>> >> >> It's the societal developement that's
>> >> >> not a choice that's the problem. I hope that doesn't confuse you any
>> >> >> more than your regular state of confusion.
>> >> >
>> >> >funny, coming from the one who talks about how stable his environment is while being afraid to experience it with a gun.
>> >> The gun makes it stable...
>> >
>> >no, the gun doesn't make it stable, you fucking idiot. If you were to be assaulted on the trail the fact that you were carrying a gun would have little to do with it - you would be assaulted either way.
>> Not likely, most thugs back off when confronted with a gun. It's in
>> their self interest to do so.
>
>The assault would still happen either way, the gun just provides different possible outcomes. It's amazing how you delude yourself that your gun somehow gives you magic protection.

<LOL> Yeah, the thug is going to keep threatening me when he sees the
gun....

> If someone is going to fuck with you, they're going to fuck with you.

Like I said, most thugs back off when confronted with a gun. It's in

their self interest to do so.

>The gun only determines the success rate.

Yes, either way, the gun is likely to lower the success rate.

>> >The gun only provides possible different outcomes.
>> >
>> >> >> >> I'm going that route.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >Good, toddle off into the sunset by yourself on your tricycle with your little gun, mr. 'self interest'. you won't be missed.
>> >> >> Actually, I'm told pretty regularly that I would be missed.
>> >> >
>> >> >Why do you care, you selfish prick?
>> >> <GRIN>
>> >
>> >oh yeah...you'll be missed fer sure....
>> Junior calls me selfish, not that I care, yet he doesn't explain what
>> makes him think I'm selfish.
>
>Wow...you still haven' figured out this internet thingie....

Wow, you still haven't figured this "self interest" thing, even though
you practice it yourself.

>"Self interest is what put human beings on the top of the food chain.

That's true...

>I'm going that route. "

You, yourself practice self interest, Dummy. I assume you make some
effort to maintain your health, see a doctor, every now and then, wear
a face diaper to protect yourself from Covid. Even the trees exert
self interest. They reach for the sunlight, often blocking it out from
whatever is below.

>fuck off.

It seems that annoy you most when I question your grasp of logic.
That's probably going to continue.

[Catrike Rider]

On Tue, 18 Apr 2023 05:23:19 -0700 (PDT), "funkma...@hotmail.com"
<funkma...@hotmail.com> wrote:

Actually, in he and Engel's Communist Manifesto, he describes "the
lower phase of communism [Socialism] as akin to the whole society
organized into a single worker cooperative." So he really didn't say
"government control," but, of course, the "single worker cooperative"
could not function without a governing presence.

>> >> Prices and
>> >> wages are set according to need, not value. What you describe is what
>> >> I call collectivism, and I do not oppose all forms of collectivism,
>> >> not even when a government does it. Indeed, some things are better
>> >> done collectively.
>> >
>> >What he's describing is _known_ as a social democracy, You can certainly call it whatever you want, it just makes you look more like an idiot.
>> social democracy, political ideology that originally advocated a
>> peaceful evolutionary transition of society from capitalism to
>> socialism using established political processes.
>> https://www.britannica.com/topic/social-democracy
>
>oh looky, kitty learned how to cut-n-paste!

Yes, it functions as a teaching tool...

>Tell us all baout how horrible it is. Let's look at the hellholes of Japan and South Korea.....The irish trolls beloved Ireland which has one of the strongest social safety systems in the world.....The Nordic Models which consistently rank as the "happiest countries in the world"....

Happy is a subjective evaluation. I wouldn't be happy there.

>.Nah - in the kitty myopic world view, anything with "social" in it is just another word for totalitarian dictatorship. There's no way _any_ application of socialist structures could be beneficial to anyone's' self interest (as he rides his tricycle on a publicly funded bike trail, which he got to by driving on publicly funded roads which are ordered by a system of laws enforced by a publicly funded police force - yeah, fuck all that socialism!).

Collectivism, not socialism, and as I said, sometimes collectivism is
the best way to do things. By the way, "the best way to do things" is
also a very subjective evaluation.

BTW, I don't understand why you get so upset about my stated opinions.
I'm not attempting to change your mind. I know your opinions are
carved in granit, as are mine.

>That's our kitty, attempting to define the world in simple single sentences....You might want to try this, dumbass....
>
>Toward the Socialism of the Future, in the Wake of the Demise of the Socialism of the Past
>https://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/handle/2027.42/68447/10.1177_048661349202400302.pdf;jsessionid=2F461B509813C24EB3613D5BF85F4305?sequence=2
>
> Economic democracy : the politics of feasible socialism
>https://archive.org/details/economicdemocrac0000arch

No, I'm not interested in reading socialist propaganda.

[AMuzi]

On 4/18/2023 4:48 AM, funkma...@hotmail.com wrote:

> On Monday, April 17, 2023 at 7:37:02 PM UTC-4, AMuzi wrote:
>> On 4/17/2023 5:26 PM, funkma...@hotmail.com wrote:

>>> On Monday, April 17, 2023 at 4:46:05 PM UTC-4, AMuzi wrote:
>>>> On 4/17/2023 2:35 PM, funkma...@hotmail.com wrote:

>>>>> On Monday, April 17, 2023 at 3:43:29 AM UTC-4, floriduh white trash wrote:
>>>>>> On Sun, 16 Apr 2023 22:38:30 -0400, Frank Krygowski
>>>>>> <frkr...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 4/16/2023 6:19 PM, Catrike Rider wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Whenever I come read or hear a wild-eyed collectivist like Krugman...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Today's reading at church, in part:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "First reading from the Book of the Acts of the Apostles
>>>>>>> Acts 2,42-47
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "They devoted themselves
>>>>>>> to the teaching of the apostles and to the communal life,
>>>>>>> to the breaking of bread and to the prayers.
>>>>>>> Awe came upon everyone,
>>>>>>> and many wonders and signs were done through the apostles.
>>>>>>> All who believed were together and had all things in common;
>>>>>>> they would sell their property and possessions

>>>>>>> and divide them among all according to each one’s need."

The 4th generation is on deck now and I'll bet you the
transition will, as ever, be unremarkable:

https://nypost.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2022/11/kim_jong_un-_daughter.jpg?w=1024

Human innovation is inherently disruptive, which is a
feature not a bug. Totalitarians seek stability and are
willing to sacrifice risk/reward, innovation and progress
for stability of the State.

[AMuzi]

On 4/18/2023 6:47 AM, funkma...@hotmail.com wrote:

> On Tuesday, April 18, 2023 at 7:08:54 AM UTC-4, John B. wrote:
>> rOn Tue, 18 Apr 2023 02:48:12 -0700 (PDT), "funkma...@hotmail.com"
>> <funkma...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Monday, April 17, 2023 at 7:37:02?PM UTC-4, AMuzi wrote:
>>>> On 4/17/2023 5:26 PM, funkma...@hotmail.com wrote:

>>>>> On Monday, April 17, 2023 at 4:46:05 PM UTC-4, AMuzi wrote:
>>>>>> On 4/17/2023 2:35 PM, funkma...@hotmail.com wrote:

>>>>>>> On Monday, April 17, 2023 at 3:43:29 AM UTC-4, floriduh white trash wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Sun, 16 Apr 2023 22:38:30 -0400, Frank Krygowski
>>>>>>>> <frkr...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 4/16/2023 6:19 PM, Catrike Rider wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Whenever I come read or hear a wild-eyed collectivist like Krugman...
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Today's reading at church, in part:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> "First reading from the Book of the Acts of the Apostles
>>>>>>>>> Acts 2,42-47
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> "They devoted themselves
>>>>>>>>> to the teaching of the apostles and to the communal life,
>>>>>>>>> to the breaking of bread and to the prayers.
>>>>>>>>> Awe came upon everyone,
>>>>>>>>> and many wonders and signs were done through the apostles.
>>>>>>>>> All who believed were together and had all things in common;
>>>>>>>>> they would sell their property and possessions

>>>>>>>>> and divide them among all according to each one’s need."

Sorta.

I believe the monarch's rule was limited by Parliament after
1688, and not the only change.

[Frank Krygowski]

Not to mention that people who rely on guns have a higher probability of getting shot.

In this case, we have a man so feeble that he's adding equipment to his tricycle so he can exit it without pain, and who admits to instability when on two feet. But he imagines that when attacked without warning he's going to perform a quick draw and blaze away, probably better than James Bond. Only this fantasy allows him to gather enough bravery to ride on a kiddie path!

FWIW, I've ridden hundreds of miles in Florida. I did it on roads, not on kiddie paths, and like everyone here but the tricycle rider, I did it without even a thought of carrying a gun. I did it with no particular problems, aside from the fact that yes, it was hot.

Some of us are less timid than others.

- Frank Krygowski

[Frank Krygowski]

On 4/18/2023 11:06 AM, AMuzi wrote:
>
> Human innovation is inherently disruptive, which is a feature not a
> bug.  Totalitarians seek stability and are willing to sacrifice
> risk/reward, innovation and progress for stability of the State.

It sounds like you're lobbying for the conditions historically present
in many African, Central American and South American countries: weak
government, frequent turmoil, frequent insurrections or revolutions,
weak enforcement of laws and lots and lots of "individual choice" backed
up by lots of gunfire.

I'm not seeing a lot of innovation and progress in those countries. For
one thing, why would anyone choose such a place to invest lots of capital?

--
- Frank Krygowski

[AMuzi]

On 4/18/2023 11:53 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> On 4/18/2023 11:06 AM, AMuzi wrote:
>>
>> Human innovation is inherently disruptive, which is a

>> feature not a bug. Totalitarians seek stability and are

>> willing to sacrifice risk/reward, innovation and progress
>> for stability of the State.
>
> It sounds like you're lobbying for the conditions
> historically present in many African, Central American and
> South American countries: weak government, frequent turmoil,
> frequent insurrections or revolutions, weak enforcement of
> laws and lots and lots of "individual choice" backed up by
> lots of gunfire.
>
> I'm not seeing a lot of innovation and progress in those
> countries. For one thing, why would anyone choose such a
> place to invest lots of capital?
>

I think that puts us to Hobbes' 'ordered liberty' with
enough structure to enforce property rights but not the
modern US socialist nanny state run amok (or even worse
current examples).

[funkma...@hotmail.com]

You've never heard of "women and children first"? nah, that would go against kitty saving his own ass.

> >> >> >https://www.researchgate.net/publication/238212623_Culture_and_the_Evolution_of_the_Human_Social_Instincts
> >> >> >"cultural evolutionary processes constructed a social environment that caused ordinary natural selection acting on genes to favor empathetic altruism, and a tendency to direct that altruism preferentially to fellow members of symbolically marked groups. These social instincts evolved in the late Pleistocene but the radically new social institutions that have evolved in the Holocene were (and continue to be) both enabled and constrained by them"
> >> >> Like I said, humans chose to band together..
> >> >
> >> >lol...kitty thinks instincts are a matter of choice.
> >> Self interest is itelf, instinctive. Some have called it "survival of
> >> the fittest" as coined by Herbert Spenser (SP?), an early libertarian.
> >
> >I didn't say it wasn't. I said humans have a social instinct.
> Some do, some don't. I don't.

Some also don't have a self preservation instinct.

> >https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/animal-emotions/201310/the-fairness-instinct-science-human-nature-and-sociality
> >> >> >"[fairness] is not, as is traditionally supposed, a purely
> ideological issue; it is emotion and behavior rooted in our DNA."
> >> >> <EYEROLL> nonsense....
> >> >
> >> >lol....Now kitty is more learned and insightful that a PhD evolutionary biologist. Do tell kitty: was your dissertation is some specialty of evolutionary biology?
> >> Like I said elsewhere, I'd need to know what the PhD evolutionary
> >> biologist's agenda is before I put any credence in his opinion. I
> >> respect your freedom to buy onto his opinion, however, I don't.
> >
> >IOW you have no qualifications on the issue, you just disagree because it goes against your personal bias. IOW - your opinions is asserted in absolute ignorance - glad you finally admit it.
> Leftists tend to believe anybody who supports their own agenda.

And white trash bigots from floriduh are the paragon of open rational discourse.....Sure kitty.

> >> >> >> It's the societal developement that's
> >> >> >> not a choice that's the problem. I hope that doesn't confuse you any
> >> >> >> more than your regular state of confusion.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >funny, coming from the one who talks about how stable his environment is while being afraid to experience it with a gun.
> >> >> The gun makes it stable...
> >> >
> >> >no, the gun doesn't make it stable, you fucking idiot. If you were to be assaulted on the trail the fact that you were carrying a gun would have little to do with it - you would be assaulted either way.
> >> Not likely, most thugs back off when confronted with a gun. It's in
> >> their self interest to do so.
> >
> >The assault would still happen either way, the gun just provides different possible outcomes. It's amazing how you delude yourself that your gun somehow gives you magic protection.
> <LOL> Yeah, the thug is going to keep threatening me when he sees the
> gun....

Strike one for kittys lack of reading comprehension

> > If someone is going to fuck with you, they're going to fuck with you.
> Like I said, most thugs back off when confronted with a gun. It's in
> their self interest to do so.

Strike two for kittys lack of reading comprehension

> >The gun only determines the success rate.
> Yes, either way, the gun is likely to lower the success rate.

Strike three for kittys lack of reading comprehension

Come back far more berating when you can understand why carrying a gun doesn't diminish the odds of being accosted.

> >> >The gun only provides possible different outcomes.
> >> >
> >> >> >> >> I'm going that route.
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >Good, toddle off into the sunset by yourself on your tricycle with your little gun, mr. 'self interest'. you won't be missed.
> >> >> >> Actually, I'm told pretty regularly that I would be missed.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >Why do you care, you selfish prick?
> >> >> <GRIN>
> >> >
> >> >oh yeah...you'll be missed fer sure....
> >> Junior calls me selfish, not that I care, yet he doesn't explain what
> >> makes him think I'm selfish.
> >
> >Wow...you still haven' figured out this internet thingie....
> Wow, you still haven't figured this "self interest" thing, even though
> you practice it yourself.

Assumptions made without facts in evidence.

> >"Self interest is what put human beings on the top of the food chain.
> That's true...
> >I'm going that route. "
> You, yourself practice self interest, Dummy. I assume you make some
> effort to maintain your health, see a doctor, every now and then, wear
> a face diaper to protect yourself from Covid.

Of course, it never occurs to a selfish prick there may be other reasons a person may want or need to maintain their health and livelyhood. IOW you selfish prick, It's not all about me, it never was, and it never will be. You might want to reread what started this recent exchange for a fucking clue. https://groups.google.com/g/rec.bicycles.tech/c/SJRhjDxotCo/m/t4z21oU_CAAJ

> Even the trees exert
> self interest. They reach for the sunlight, often blocking it out from
> whatever is below.

Sure, let's conflate a non-sentient biological process human genetic imperatives. Which brings us to:

> It seems that annoy you most when I question your grasp of logic.

It would if you had any rational basis for it - thus far it's just more floriduh white-trash selfish bigotry and pathetically simplistic attempts at analogies.

> That's probably going to continue.

When you can understand that a tree straining for the sunlight isn't in any way even remotely similar to the human genetic imperative of creating safe social environments, you might be able to give me pause about my grasp of reality. Until then your selfish and myopic world view are little removed from the kunich rants about ukrainian genocide squads.

fuck off.

[funkma...@hotmail.com]

Yeah,...too bad you didn't learn anything from it.

> >Tell us all baout how horrible it is. Let's look at the hellholes of Japan and South Korea.....The irish trolls beloved Ireland which has one of the strongest social safety systems in the world.....The Nordic Models which consistently rank as the "happiest countries in the world"....
> Happy is a subjective evaluation. I wouldn't be happy there.

They wouldn't be happy with you there either. win-win.

> >.Nah - in the kitty myopic world view, anything with "social" in it is just another word for totalitarian dictatorship. There's no way _any_ application of socialist structures could be beneficial to anyone's' self interest (as he rides his tricycle on a publicly funded bike trail, which he got to by driving on publicly funded roads which are ordered by a system of laws enforced by a publicly funded police force - yeah, fuck all that socialism!).
> Collectivism, not socialism, and as I said, sometimes collectivism is
> the best way to do things.

Like I said, You can certainly call it whatever you want, it just makes you look more like an idiot.

> By the way, "the best way to do things" is
> also a very subjective evaluation.

Only for selfish pricks.

> BTW, I don't understand why you get so upset about my stated opinions.
> I'm not attempting to change your mind. I know your opinions are
> carved in granit, as are mine.

perhaps it's because you attempt to contradict people by deleting certain statements from their messages, then claim they never made those statements.

> >That's our kitty, attempting to define the world in simple single sentences....You might want to try this, dumbass....
> >
> >Toward the Socialism of the Future, in the Wake of the Demise of the Socialism of the Past
> >https://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/handle/2027.42/68447/10.1177_048661349202400302.pdf;jsessionid=2F461B509813C24EB3613D5BF85F4305?sequence=2
> >
> > Economic democracy : the politics of feasible socialism
> >https://archive.org/details/economicdemocrac0000arch
> No, I'm not interested in reading socialist propaganda.

Yeah, no sense in trying to understand the motivations of those you disagree with, Better just to wallow in your own ignorance.

[funkma...@hotmail.com]

Maybe, maybe not.

>
> Human innovation is inherently disruptive, which is a
> feature not a bug.

Innovation doesn't have much chance in an unstable society. Progress and change are not anathema to a stable society.

> Totalitarians seek stability and are
> willing to sacrifice risk/reward, innovation and progress
> for stability of the State.

You and I have very different interpretations of 'stability'

[Tom Kunich]

Over and over again Flunky shows you why he remains anonymous. Also his courage is that of distance an anonymity. Neither he nor Krygowski put any time in the military. Yet more of their courage on display. But they can call names with all of their courage on display.

[Tom Kunich]

What things are done better collectively or socialistically?

[Tom Kunich]

People are NORMALLY self centered and that is why no socialist or if you prefer communist government has EVER succeeded. With the half ass capitalist government in Russia at the moment the people themselves are 100 times better off than under communism. Do you know how China's communism works? With slave labor. Central and South American socialism have triggered the border crisis here. Remember that in 20 years from now all of these illegals will be completely Americanized and the danger then will not be from stupid antics of illegals but a hatred so bitter towards socialism that they may very well push us into a war.

[Tom Kunich]

There are simply too many North Koreans that want to escape to the Capitalist South. This means that the kneeling to the state will grow to a disruptive civil war with a large portion of the NK army going with the rebels. THIS is truly dangerous because they will not use nuclear weapons on themselves but rather on others to change the focus.

[John B.]

Way back When the U.S. government initiated two new government
agencies, the CCC and the WPA which gave unemployed people a job and
they actually accomplished things. Many State or National Parks were
essentially built by these agencies.

Now, of course the process has been simplified and they just hand the
pay for not working straight to the unemployed, thus eliminating the
"doing something" phase.
--
Cheers,

John B.

[Catrike Rider]

On Tue, 18 Apr 2023 09:46:29 -0700 (PDT), Frank Krygowski
<frkr...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On 4/18/2023 8:00 AM, funkma...@hotmail.com wrote:

>> On Tuesday, April 18, 2023 at 7:37:56?AM UTC-4, Catrike Rider wrote:
>>> On Tue, 18 Apr 2023 04:20:24 -0700 (PDT), "funkma...@hotmail.com"
>>> <funkma...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On Tuesday, April 18, 2023 at 5:58:00?AM UTC-4, floriduh white trash wrote:
>>>>> On Tue, 18 Apr 2023 02:39:23 -0700 (PDT), "funkma...@hotmail.com"
>>>>> <funkma...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> On Monday, April 17, 2023 at 7:33:20?PM UTC-4, floriduh white trash wrote:
>>>>>>> On Mon, 17 Apr 2023 15:31:54 -0700 (PDT), "funkma...@hotmail.com"
>>>>>>> <funkma...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> funny, coming from the one who talks about how stable his environment is while being afraid to experience it with a gun.
>>>>> The gun makes it stable...
>>>>
>>>> no, the gun doesn't make it stable, you fucking idiot. If you were to be assaulted on the trail the fact that you were carrying a gun would have little to do with it - you would be assaulted either way.>>> Not likely, most thugs back off when confronted with a gun. It's in
>>> their self interest to do so.
>>
>> The assault would still happen either way, the gun just provides different possible outcomes. It's amazing how you delude yourself that your gun somehow gives you magic protection. If someone is going to fuck with you, they're going to fuck with you. The gun only determines the success rate.
>
>Not to mention that people who rely on guns have a higher probability of getting shot.

Assumes facts not in evidence... again

>In this case, we have a man so feeble that he's adding equipment to his tricycle so he can exit it without pain, and who admits to instability when on two feet. But he imagines that when attacked without warning he's going to perform a quick draw and blaze away, probably better than James Bond. Only this fantasy allows him to gather enough bravery to ride on a kiddie path!

...nd yet I don't fear big black pickup trucks, I'm not afraid to
fasten my shoes to the peadals.. (I did it on two wheelers, too, ) I'm
not afraid of dogs

>FWIW, I've ridden hundreds of miles in Florida. I did it on roads, not on kiddie paths, and like everyone here but the tricycle rider, I did it without even a thought of carrying a gun. I did it with no particular problems, aside from the fact that yes, it was hot.
>
>Some of us are less timid than others.

..and yet you indicate that you're afraid you'll be shot if you have a
gun in your house. What a pathetic pussy you are to be afraid of guns.

>- Frank Krygowski

[Andre Jute]

It is beyond argument that Mrs Thatcher was a better socialist than Karl Marx, in that, starting as an education minister under Edward Heath (where she was as guilty of screwing the British education system as Shirley Williams from the Labour Party who, predictably, was hired as a professor by Harvard after she proved to be a useless politician), she turned more of the Communist Manifesto of 1848 into reality than Marx ever did, and used the better part of his logic to ingrain the order conservatives stand for better than anyone else since Otto von Bismarck; she's particularly hated by the more brainless pinkoes for putting down the bolshie coal miners and the IRA, but in fact her most valuable and longest-lasting legacy is that she turned the working class into middle class property owners by selling them on favourable terms their council houses and publicly owned utilities. Hell, for that matter, Churchill was a better socialist than Karl Marx in both belief and action, most notably in setting up an investigation under Duncan Sandys about how the Conservative Party could contribute to a postwar "home for heroes to return to". Churchill explicitly believed that to survive, Conservatism should adapt at least in style. Churchill was vindicated half a century later when Tony Blair stole Mrs Thatcher's clothes wholesale, relabelled her policies "New Labour", and governed better than any left-winger except Lloyd George in that entire century. (Yeah, yeah, I know, Blair basically belonged to the same class as the Conservatives, but that's as common in the UK as it is in the US.)
>
The thing is, Andrew, in an age of mass democracy, you and I and those who stand too pat on the principles of conservatism are the ones out of step. Our side wins, mostly, because we are and have superior thinkers. and it is actually amazing how often we win.
>
The problem with American socialism is that it has no unified philosophy behind it, that in practice it is a patchwork of half-hearted ad hoc actions, almost as if it were designed to create chaos. We saw in the USSR that communism driven by the will of a dictator who made it up as he went along (Marx wasn't in it except as a figurehead from well before 1917) was a recipe for stagnation and chaos. The European mixed economies are expensive to operate and regrettably wasteful, but they work very well indeed for their citizens as comfortable places to live and work in, precisely because almost everyone agrees to the principles behind them -- except the British, who by comparison have a millennium of huge stability since 1066 behind them, and the unifying symbol of the monarch, who personifies recovery after temporary upsets like a few civil wars that would break, and have broken, less firmly rooted nations.
>.
Andre Jute
Those who won't learn from history will be taught painful lessons by History.

[Catrike Rider]

On Tue, 18 Apr 2023 13:59:53 -0700 (PDT), "funkma...@hotmail.com"
<funkma...@hotmail.com> wrote:

Uhhh, when did I imply anything like that, Dummy?

>> >> >> >https://www.researchgate.net/publication/238212623_Culture_and_the_Evolution_of_the_Human_Social_Instincts
>> >> >> >"cultural evolutionary processes constructed a social environment that caused ordinary natural selection acting on genes to favor empathetic altruism, and a tendency to direct that altruism preferentially to fellow members of symbolically marked groups. These social instincts evolved in the late Pleistocene but the radically new social institutions that have evolved in the Holocene were (and continue to be) both enabled and constrained by them"
>> >> >> Like I said, humans chose to band together..
>> >> >
>> >> >lol...kitty thinks instincts are a matter of choice.
>> >> Self interest is itelf, instinctive. Some have called it "survival of
>> >> the fittest" as coined by Herbert Spenser (SP?), an early libertarian.
>> >
>> >I didn't say it wasn't. I said humans have a social instinct.
>> Some do, some don't. I don't.
>
>Some also don't have a self preservation instinct.

IMO, suicides not a good thing

>https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/animal-emotions/201310/the-fairness-instinct-science-human-nature-and-sociality
>> >> >> >"[fairness] is not, as is traditionally supposed, a purely
>> ideological issue; it is emotion and behavior rooted in our DNA."
>> >> >> <EYEROLL> nonsense....
>> >> >
>> >> >lol....Now kitty is more learned and insightful that a PhD evolutionary biologist. Do tell kitty: was your dissertation is some specialty of evolutionary biology?
>> >> Like I said elsewhere, I'd need to know what the PhD evolutionary
>> >> biologist's agenda is before I put any credence in his opinion. I
>> >> respect your freedom to buy onto his opinion, however, I don't.
>> >
>> >IOW you have no qualifications on the issue, you just disagree because it goes against your personal bias. IOW - your opinions is asserted in absolute ignorance - glad you finally admit it.
>> Leftists tend to believe anybody who supports their own agenda.
>
>And white trash bigots from floriduh are the paragon of open rational discourse.....Sure kitty.

I con;t think of sny reason I should have rational discourse with
people I don't respect...

>> >> >> >> It's the societal developement that's
>> >> >> >> not a choice that's the problem. I hope that doesn't confuse you any
>> >> >> >> more than your regular state of confusion.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >funny, coming from the one who talks about how stable his environment is while being afraid to experience it with a gun.
>> >> >> The gun makes it stable...
>> >> >
>> >> >no, the gun doesn't make it stable, you fucking idiot. If you were to be assaulted on the trail the fact that you were carrying a gun would have little to do with it - you would be assaulted either way.
>> >> Not likely, most thugs back off when confronted with a gun. It's in
>> >> their self interest to do so.
>> >
>> >The assault would still happen either way, the gun just provides different possible outcomes. It's amazing how you delude yourself that your gun somehow gives you magic protection.
>> <LOL> Yeah, the thug is going to keep threatening me when he sees the
>> gun....
>
>Strike one for kittys lack of reading comprehension
>
>> > If someone is going to fuck with you, they're going to fuck with you.
>> Like I said, most thugs back off when confronted with a gun. It's in
>> their self interest to do so.
>
>Strike two for kittys lack of reading comprehension
>
>> >The gun only determines the success rate.
>> Yes, either way, the gun is likely to lower the success rate.
>
>Strike three for kittys lack of reading comprehension
>
>Come back far more berating when you can understand why carrying a gun doesn't diminish the odds of being accosted.

Assumes facts not in evidence...

>> >> >The gun only provides possible different outcomes.
>> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> I'm going that route.
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >Good, toddle off into the sunset by yourself on your tricycle with your little gun, mr. 'self interest'. you won't be missed.
>> >> >> >> Actually, I'm told pretty regularly that I would be missed.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >Why do you care, you selfish prick?
>> >> >> <GRIN>
>> >> >
>> >> >oh yeah...you'll be missed fer sure....
>> >> Junior calls me selfish, not that I care, yet he doesn't explain what
>> >> makes him think I'm selfish.
>> >
>> >Wow...you still haven' figured out this internet thingie....
>> Wow, you still haven't figured this "self interest" thing, even though
>> you practice it yourself.
>
>Assumptions made without facts in evidence.

Everyone acts on their self interest. Most do it regularly...

>> >"Self interest is what put human beings on the top of the food chain.
>> That's true...
>> >I'm going that route. "
>> You, yourself practice self interest, Dummy. I assume you make some
>> effort to maintain your health, see a doctor, every now and then, wear
>> a face diaper to protect yourself from Covid.
>
>Of course, it never occurs to a selfish prick there may be other reasons a person may want or need to maintain their health and livelyhood.

<LOL> Well, perhaps you wore a face diaper because gibberish joe you
to.

IOW you selfish prick, It's not all about me, it never was, and it
never will be. You might want to reread what started this recent
exchange for a fucking clue.
https://groups.google.com/g/rec.bicycles.tech/c/SJRhjDxotCo/m/t4z21oU_CAAJ

No interested in rehashing...

>> Even the trees exert
>> self interest. They reach for the sunlight, often blocking it out from
>> whatever is below.
>
>Sure, let's conflate a non-sentient biological process human genetic imperatives. Which brings us to:

Sex is more ofetn than not, a result of self interest.

>> It seems that annoy you most when I question your grasp of logic.
>
>It would if you had any rational basis for it - thus far it's just more floriduh white-trash selfish bigotry and pathetically simplistic attempts at analogies.

Sorry, I didn't intend to confuse you more...

>> That's probably going to continue.
>
>When you can understand that a tree straining for the sunlight isn't in any way even remotely similar to the human genetic imperative of creating safe social environments, you might be able to give me pause about my grasp of reality. Until then your selfish and myopic world view are little removed from the kunich rants about ukrainian genocide squads.
>
>fuck off.

<GRIN>

[Catrike Rider]

On Tue, 18 Apr 2023 14:12:47 -0700 (PDT), "funkma...@hotmail.com"
<funkma...@hotmail.com> wrote:

>On Tuesday, April 18, 2023 at 9:57:55?AM UTC-4, xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
>> On Tue, 18 Apr 2023 05:23:19 -0700 (PDT), "funkma...@hotmail.com"
>> <funkma...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>> >> >> IMHO, Socialism is the public (government) ownership and control of
>> >> >> the business world, ie, everybody works for the government.
>> >> >
>> >> >Your opinion is duly noted, and dismissed as an ignorant and uninformed opinion.
>> >> Well, that's pretty much how Marx described it...
>> >
>> >in your ignorant and uninformed opinion.
>> Actually, in he and Engel's Communist Manifesto, he describes "the
>> lower phase of communism [Socialism] as akin to the whole society
>> organized into a single worker cooperative." So he really didn't say
>> "government control," but, of course, the "single worker cooperative"
>> could not function without a governing presence.
>
>in your ignorant and uninformed opinion.

Just quoting Marx and Engel.. Take it or leave it.

>> >> >> Prices and
>> >> >> wages are set according to need, not value. What you describe is what
>> >> >> I call collectivism, and I do not oppose all forms of collectivism,
>> >> >> not even when a government does it. Indeed, some things are better
>> >> >> done collectively.
>> >> >
>> >> >What he's describing is _known_ as a social democracy, You can certainly call it whatever you want, it just makes you look more like an idiot.
>> >> social democracy, political ideology that originally advocated a
>> >> peaceful evolutionary transition of society from capitalism to
>> >> socialism using established political processes.
>> >> https://www.britannica.com/topic/social-democracy
>> >
>> >oh looky, kitty learned how to cut-n-paste!
>> Yes, it functions as a teaching tool...
>
>Yeah,...too bad you didn't learn anything from it.
>
>> >Tell us all baout how horrible it is. Let's look at the hellholes of Japan and South Korea.....The irish trolls beloved Ireland which has one of the strongest social safety systems in the world.....The Nordic Models which consistently rank as the "happiest countries in the world"....
>> Happy is a subjective evaluation. I wouldn't be happy there.
>
>They wouldn't be happy with you there either. win-win.

Probably true... People with Socialist tendabcies are not people I
want to be around, nor would they be comfortable with me. I'd leave
as quickly as possible.

>> >.Nah - in the kitty myopic world view, anything with "social" in it is just another word for totalitarian dictatorship. There's no way _any_ application of socialist structures could be beneficial to anyone's' self interest (as he rides his tricycle on a publicly funded bike trail, which he got to by driving on publicly funded roads which are ordered by a system of laws enforced by a publicly funded police force - yeah, fuck all that socialism!).
>> Collectivism, not socialism, and as I said, sometimes collectivism is
>> the best way to do things.
>
>Like I said, You can certainly call it whatever you want, it just makes you look more like an idiot.
>
>> By the way, "the best way to do things" is
>> also a very subjective evaluation.
>
>Only for selfish pricks.
>
>> BTW, I don't understand why you get so upset about my stated opinions.
>> I'm not attempting to change your mind. I know your opinions are
>> carved in granit, as are mine.
>
>perhaps it's because you attempt to contradict people by deleting certain statements from their messages, then claim they never made those statements.
>
>> >That's our kitty, attempting to define the world in simple single sentences....You might want to try this, dumbass....
>> >
>> >Toward the Socialism of the Future, in the Wake of the Demise of the Socialism of the Past
>> >https://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/handle/2027.42/68447/10.1177_048661349202400302.pdf;jsessionid=2F461B509813C24EB3613D5BF85F4305?sequence=2
>> >
>> > Economic democracy : the politics of feasible socialism
>> >https://archive.org/details/economicdemocrac0000arch
>> No, I'm not interested in reading socialist propaganda.
>
>Yeah, no sense in trying to understand the motivations of those you disagree with,

<LOL> I really REALLY don't care what your motivations are....

> Better just to wallow in your own ignorance.

Junior is expressing his confusion... I wonder if he does that often

[Catrike Rider]

On Tue, 18 Apr 2023 16:01:50 -0700 (PDT), Tom Kunich
<cycl...@gmail.com> wrote:

Nothing socialistically.. But the armed forces, highways, airports
are better done collectively. Did I mention bike trials?

[John B.]

On Wed, 19 Apr 2023 07:13:55 +0700, John B. <sloc...@gmail.com>
wrote:

>On Tue, 18 Apr 2023 10:06:44 -0500, AMuzi <a...@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
>
>>On 4/18/2023 4:48 AM, funkma...@hotmail.com wrote:

>>> On Monday, April 17, 2023 at 7:37:02 PM UTC-4, AMuzi wrote:
>>>> On 4/17/2023 5:26 PM, funkma...@hotmail.com wrote:

>>>>> On Monday, April 17, 2023 at 4:46:05 PM UTC-4, AMuzi wrote:
>>>>>> On 4/17/2023 2:35 PM, funkma...@hotmail.com wrote:

>>>>>>> On Monday, April 17, 2023 at 3:43:29 AM UTC-4, floriduh white trash wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Sun, 16 Apr 2023 22:38:30 -0400, Frank Krygowski
>>>>>>>> <frkr...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 4/16/2023 6:19 PM, Catrike Rider wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Whenever I come read or hear a wild-eyed collectivist like Krugman...
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Today's reading at church, in part:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> "First reading from the Book of the Acts of the Apostles
>>>>>>>>> Acts 2,42-47
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> "They devoted themselves
>>>>>>>>> to the teaching of the apostles and to the communal life,
>>>>>>>>> to the breaking of bread and to the prayers.
>>>>>>>>> Awe came upon everyone,
>>>>>>>>> and many wonders and signs were done through the apostles.
>>>>>>>>> All who believed were together and had all things in common;
>>>>>>>>> they would sell their property and possessions

>>>>>>>>> and divide them among all according to each one’s need."

>The think that some of the posters above neglect to mention is that N.
>Korea, while obviously "led" by a member of the Kim family the Kim
>family does not rule alone. Without the backing of the military and
>probably the police, and the leaders of the various cities and
>"states" there is no way that one man or one family, can control an
>entire country.
>
>As an example, George Washington, who some were discussing as "king"
>had to call out some 12,900 militia, a rather large military force fo the time, to put down a rebellion
>by the whiskey makers from a rather remote part of the U.S.
--
Cheers,

John B.

[John B.]

On Tue, 18 Apr 2023 09:46:29 -0700 (PDT), Frank Krygowski
<frkr...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On 4/18/2023 8:00 AM, funkma...@hotmail.com wrote:

>> On Tuesday, April 18, 2023 at 7:37:56?AM UTC-4, Catrike Rider wrote:
>>> On Tue, 18 Apr 2023 04:20:24 -0700 (PDT), "funkma...@hotmail.com"
>>> <funkma...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On Tuesday, April 18, 2023 at 5:58:00?AM UTC-4, floriduh white trash wrote:
>>>>> On Tue, 18 Apr 2023 02:39:23 -0700 (PDT), "funkma...@hotmail.com"
>>>>> <funkma...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> On Monday, April 17, 2023 at 7:33:20?PM UTC-4, floriduh white trash wrote:
>>>>>>> On Mon, 17 Apr 2023 15:31:54 -0700 (PDT), "funkma...@hotmail.com"
>>>>>>> <funkma...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> funny, coming from the one who talks about how stable his environment is while being afraid to experience it with a gun.
>>>>> The gun makes it stable...
>>>>
>>>> no, the gun doesn't make it stable, you fucking idiot. If you were to be assaulted on the trail the fact that you were carrying a gun would have little to do with it - you would be assaulted either way.>>> Not likely, most thugs back off when confronted with a gun. It's in
>>> their self interest to do so.
>>
>> The assault would still happen either way, the gun just provides different possible outcomes. It's amazing how you delude yourself that your gun somehow gives you magic protection. If someone is going to fuck with you, they're going to fuck with you. The gun only determines the success rate.
>
>Not to mention that people who rely on guns have a higher probability of getting shot.

Are you sure about that? Growing up in a small New England town many
had guns in the house and certainly every farm family had at least one
gun - how else to keep the fox out of the chicken house? And I never
even heard of a gun death. Not one!

Maybe it isn't the gun at fault but the people.
--
Cheers,

John B.

[John B.]

On Tue, 18 Apr 2023 10:06:44 -0500, AMuzi <a...@yellowjersey.org> wrote:

>On 4/18/2023 4:48 AM, funkma...@hotmail.com wrote:

>> On Monday, April 17, 2023 at 7:37:02 PM UTC-4, AMuzi wrote:
>>> On 4/17/2023 5:26 PM, funkma...@hotmail.com wrote:

>>>> On Monday, April 17, 2023 at 4:46:05 PM UTC-4, AMuzi wrote:
>>>>> On 4/17/2023 2:35 PM, funkma...@hotmail.com wrote:

>>>>>> On Monday, April 17, 2023 at 3:43:29 AM UTC-4, floriduh white trash wrote:
>>>>>>> On Sun, 16 Apr 2023 22:38:30 -0400, Frank Krygowski
>>>>>>> <frkr...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 4/16/2023 6:19 PM, Catrike Rider wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Whenever I come read or hear a wild-eyed collectivist like Krugman...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Today's reading at church, in part:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "First reading from the Book of the Acts of the Apostles
>>>>>>>> Acts 2,42-47
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "They devoted themselves
>>>>>>>> to the teaching of the apostles and to the communal life,
>>>>>>>> to the breaking of bread and to the prayers.
>>>>>>>> Awe came upon everyone,
>>>>>>>> and many wonders and signs were done through the apostles.
>>>>>>>> All who believed were together and had all things in common;
>>>>>>>> they would sell their property and possessions

>>>>>>>> and divide them among all according to each one’s need."

The think that some of the posters above neglect to mention is that N.
Korea, while obviously "led" by a member of the Kim family the Kim
family does not rule alone. Without the backing of the military and
probably the police, and the leaders of the various cities and
"states" there is no way that one man or one family, can control an
entire country.

As an example, George Washington, who some were discussing as "king"

had to call out a rather large military force to put down a rebellion

[John B.]

On Tue, 18 Apr 2023 04:47:09 -0700 (PDT), "funkma...@hotmail.com"
<funkma...@hotmail.com> wrote:

>On Tuesday, April 18, 2023 at 7:08:54?AM UTC-4, John B. wrote:
>> rOn Tue, 18 Apr 2023 02:48:12 -0700 (PDT), "funkma...@hotmail.com"

>> <funkma...@hotmail.com> wrote:

>> >On Monday, April 17, 2023 at 7:37:02?PM UTC-4, AMuzi wrote:
>> >> On 4/17/2023 5:26 PM, funkma...@hotmail.com wrote:

>> >> > On Monday, April 17, 2023 at 4:46:05?PM UTC-4, AMuzi wrote:
>> >> >> On 4/17/2023 2:35 PM, funkma...@hotmail.com wrote:

>> >> >>> On Monday, April 17, 2023 at 3:43:29 AM UTC-4, floriduh white trash wrote:
>> >> >>>> On Sun, 16 Apr 2023 22:38:30 -0400, Frank Krygowski
>> >> >>>> <frkr...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>>> On 4/16/2023 6:19 PM, Catrike Rider wrote:
>> >> >>>>>>
>> >> >>>>>> Whenever I come read or hear a wild-eyed collectivist like Krugman...
>> >> >>>>>
>> >> >>>>> Today's reading at church, in part:
>> >> >>>>>
>> >> >>>>> "First reading from the Book of the Acts of the Apostles
>> >> >>>>> Acts 2,42-47
>> >> >>>>>
>> >> >>>>> "They devoted themselves
>> >> >>>>> to the teaching of the apostles and to the communal life,
>> >> >>>>> to the breaking of bread and to the prayers.
>> >> >>>>> Awe came upon everyone,
>> >> >>>>> and many wonders and signs were done through the apostles.
>> >> >>>>> All who believed were together and had all things in common;
>> >> >>>>> they would sell their property and possessions

>> >> >>>>> and divide them among all according to each one’s need."

>> Are you sure about that?
>

>Yes.
>
>> The English have a government based largely
>> on law, originating with the Magna Carta, signed in 1215, which
>> established a code of laws for England.
>
>At the time of the American Revolution, England was still for all intents and purposes an absolute monarchy. It wasn't until the Reform Act of 1832 where the power of the monarchy was officially reduced to be largely ceremonial and the representative parliament became the dominant legislative force. The power of the monarchy had been waning before that, but in the 1770's the Kings word was still law.
>

Nope.
As early as the 10th century, when "England" first appeared, the King
had assemblies of "noblemen" who debated various problems and
"recommended" solutions to the King. The beginning of the "English
Parliament". And before you say that the King held the ultimate power
read a little history. The Nobility controlled the armed forces and
essentially approved and supported the King's policy or if they
disapproved it refused to lead their forces in war. As late as 1485
Richard III was killed in battle as the Earl of Northumberland,
leading about 1/3 of Richard's army refused to support him in the
Battle of Bosworth, Richard died on the battle field.

--
Cheers,

John B.

[John B.]

But, but, but.... Guns are so dangerious! Why they might even leap out
of the Gun Cabinet, run out into the road and start shooting people!

As an aside, the charts (2019)I see, indicate that nearly twice the
number of homicides are carried out with "personal weapons - hands and
feet" as are carried out with those deadly rifles, of any sort.

We MUST control those deadly hands and feet!!!

--
Cheers,

John B.

[Frank Krygowski]

On 4/18/2023 9:01 PM, John B. wrote:
>
> As an aside, the charts (2019)I see, indicate that nearly twice the
> number of homicides are carried out with "personal weapons - hands and
> feet" as are carried out with those deadly rifles, of any sort.

Have you or your wife spoken to your doctor about your repeating
discussion points that have been repeatedly rebutted? It may be time for
an evaluation.

In any case, I'm getting tired of typing some of the same responses over
and over and over. Those responses are clearly not sinking in!

--
- Frank Krygowski

[Frank Krygowski]

The links to the studies and data have been posted here repeatedly.
That's true whether you remember or not.

> Maybe it isn't the gun at fault but the people.

People without guns rarely shoot people using guns. That should be obvious.

--
- Frank Krygowski

[John B.]

Well no. You run up and down the sidewalk waving your hands and
screaming and I post actual data. So no, your responses aren't
"sinking in".
--
Cheers,

John B.

[John B.]

On Tue, 18 Apr 2023 22:56:33 -0400, Frank Krygowski
<frkr...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

>On 4/18/2023 8:17 PM, John B. wrote:
>> On Tue, 18 Apr 2023 09:46:29 -0700 (PDT), Frank Krygowski
>> <frkr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Not to mention that people who rely on guns have a higher probability of getting shot.
>>
>> Are you sure about that? Growing up in a small New England town many
>> had guns in the house and certainly every farm family had at least one
>> gun - how else to keep the fox out of the chicken house? And I never
>> even heard of a gun death. Not one!
>
>The links to the studies and data have been posted here repeatedly.
>That's true whether you remember or not.
>

Errr sorry, but I've seen no studies and data regarding firearm
homicides in rural New England. When did you post them?
--
Cheers,

John B.

[Catrike Rider]

On Tue, 18 Apr 2023 22:54:31 -0400, Frank Krygowski
<frkr...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

>On 4/18/2023 9:01 PM, John B. wrote:
>>
>> As an aside, the charts (2019)I see, indicate that nearly twice the
>> number of homicides are carried out with "personal weapons - hands and
>> feet" as are carried out with those deadly rifles, of any sort.
>
>Have you or your wife spoken to your doctor about your repeating
>discussion points that have been repeatedly rebutted?

They've only been "rebutted" in Krugowski's fertile imagination.

>It may be time for
>an evaluation.
>
>In any case, I'm getting tired of typing some of the same responses over
>and over and over. Those responses are clearly not sinking in!

<CHUCKLE> Ya think?

[Catrike Rider]

On Tue, 18 Apr 2023 22:56:33 -0400, Frank Krygowski
<frkr...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

>On 4/18/2023 8:17 PM, John B. wrote:
>> On Tue, 18 Apr 2023 09:46:29 -0700 (PDT), Frank Krygowski
>> <frkr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Not to mention that people who rely on guns have a higher probability of getting shot.
>>
>> Are you sure about that? Growing up in a small New England town many
>> had guns in the house and certainly every farm family had at least one
>> gun - how else to keep the fox out of the chicken house? And I never
>> even heard of a gun death. Not one!
>
>The links to the studies and data have been posted here repeatedly.
>That's true whether you remember or not.

Oh yeah, the studies that fallaciously argue that correlation equals
causation.

[Catrike Rider]

On Wed, 19 Apr 2023 11:48:03 +0700, John B. <sloc...@gmail.com>
wrote:

What I've "absorbed" from Krygowski's wild-eyed rants is that he's
terribly afraid of guns, even to the point of simply having one in his
home puts him in jeopardy of being shot.

[John B.]

Out of curiosity I did a bit of "counting on my fingers". I believe
that is common knowledge, at least it has been stated time and time
again, that there are some 20 million civilian owned terrifying AR
type rifle in the U.S.

And our resident Bigot references a youtube of people shooting at
paper targets to justify his statement that anyone who possesses an AR
is some sort of "Rambo".

Now I didn't watch his youtube show but given the usual length of a
youtube "movie" it couldn't have showed more then a few fat old men
shooting at targets, but to be on the safe side lets say the movie
showed, oh, lets say maybe 50 people.

That would be 50 divided by 20,000,000 or 0.00025% of the AR mob.

One doesn't have to be an engineer to realize that our embittered old
"expert" is basing his "truth" on an amazingly tiny portion of the AR
owners.

Ah well....the old fellow has to justify his fantasies somehow, and
certainly 0.00025% is better then nothing.
--
Cheers,

John B.

[John B.]

Well, there are statistics that show that if you live in a household
where there are guns you are more likely to die from being shot then
from being hacked up with a cleaver or beaten to death with a baseball
bat. Which, of course, makes perfect sense.

And there are other statistics that show that you are nearly twice
more likely to be murdered by being kicked or punched to death then
from being shot with the dreadfully dangerious AR. But in spite of
being shown that statistic Old Frankie seems to have forgotten it ....
or at least he never mentions it.
--
Cheers,

John B.

[Catrike Rider]

On Wed, 19 Apr 2023 15:58:11 +0700, John B. <sloc...@gmail.com>

Krygowski can't understand why he's being laughed at instead of being
taken seriously. After all, he has one of those paper degree thingies
hanging on his wall, he has planned group bicycle rides, and he is an
expert at making up stories about his imaginary friends.

[funkma...@hotmail.com]

On Tuesday, April 18, 2023 at 7:59:58 PM UTC-4, floriduh white trash wrote:
> On Tue, 18 Apr 2023 13:59:53 -0700 (PDT), "funkma...@hotmail.com"
>
> >

> >You've never heard of "women and children first"? nah, that would go against kitty saving his own ass.
> Uhhh, when did I imply anything like that, Dummy?

"Self interest is what put human beings on the top of the food chain.

I'm going that route. "

> >> >> >> >https://www.researchgate.net/publication/238212623_Culture_and_the_Evolution_of_the_Human_Social_Instincts
> >> >> >> >"cultural evolutionary processes constructed a social environment that caused ordinary natural selection acting on genes to favor empathetic altruism, and a tendency to direct that altruism preferentially to fellow members of symbolically marked groups. These social instincts evolved in the late Pleistocene but the radically new social institutions that have evolved in the Holocene were (and continue to be) both enabled and constrained by them"
> >> >> >> Like I said, humans chose to band together..
> >> >> >
> >> >> >lol...kitty thinks instincts are a matter of choice.
> >> >> Self interest is itelf, instinctive. Some have called it "survival of
> >> >> the fittest" as coined by Herbert Spenser (SP?), an early libertarian.
> >> >
> >> >I didn't say it wasn't. I said humans have a social instinct.
> >> Some do, some don't. I don't.
> >
> >Some also don't have a self preservation instinct.
> IMO, suicides not a good thing

No one said they were and I wasn't talking about suicide, you fucking idiot - this is why you aren't qualified to have a rational conversation.

> >https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/animal-emotions/201310/the-fairness-instinct-science-human-nature-and-sociality
> >> >> >> >"[fairness] is not, as is traditionally supposed, a purely
> >> ideological issue; it is emotion and behavior rooted in our DNA."
> >> >> >> <EYEROLL> nonsense....
> >> >> >
> >> >> >lol....Now kitty is more learned and insightful that a PhD evolutionary biologist. Do tell kitty: was your dissertation is some specialty of evolutionary biology?
> >> >> Like I said elsewhere, I'd need to know what the PhD evolutionary
> >> >> biologist's agenda is before I put any credence in his opinion. I
> >> >> respect your freedom to buy onto his opinion, however, I don't.
> >> >
> >> >IOW you have no qualifications on the issue, you just disagree because it goes against your personal bias. IOW - your opinions is asserted in absolute ignorance - glad you finally admit it.
> >> Leftists tend to believe anybody who supports their own agenda.
> >
> >And white trash bigots from floriduh are the paragon of open rational discourse.....Sure kitty.
> I con;t think of sny reason I should have rational discourse with
> people I don't respect...

Which is why no one here has rational discussions with you.

> >> >> >> >> It's the societal developement that's
> >> >> >> >> not a choice that's the problem. I hope that doesn't confuse you any
> >> >> >> >> more than your regular state of confusion.
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >funny, coming from the one who talks about how stable his environment is while being afraid to experience it with a gun.
> >> >> >> The gun makes it stable...
> >> >> >
> >> >> >no, the gun doesn't make it stable, you fucking idiot. If you were to be assaulted on the trail the fact that you were carrying a gun would have little to do with it - you would be assaulted either way.
> >> >> Not likely, most thugs back off when confronted with a gun. It's in
> >> >> their self interest to do so.
> >> >
> >> >The assault would still happen either way, the gun just provides different possible outcomes. It's amazing how you delude yourself that your gun somehow gives you magic protection.
> >> <LOL> Yeah, the thug is going to keep threatening me when he sees the
> >> gun....
> >
> >Strike one for kittys lack of reading comprehension
> >
> >> > If someone is going to fuck with you, they're going to fuck with you.
> >> Like I said, most thugs back off when confronted with a gun. It's in
> >> their self interest to do so.
> >
> >Strike two for kittys lack of reading comprehension
> >
> >> >The gun only determines the success rate.
> >> Yes, either way, the gun is likely to lower the success rate.
> >
> >Strike three for kittys lack of reading comprehension
> >
> >Come back far more berating when you can understand why carrying a gun doesn't diminish the odds of being accosted.
> Assumes facts not in evidence...

It's bad etiquette to hang around the batters box after you've been struck out.

> >> >> >The gun only provides possible different outcomes.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> I'm going that route.
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >Good, toddle off into the sunset by yourself on your tricycle with your little gun, mr. 'self interest'. you won't be missed.
> >> >> >> >> Actually, I'm told pretty regularly that I would be missed.
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >Why do you care, you selfish prick?
> >> >> >> <GRIN>
> >> >> >
> >> >> >oh yeah...you'll be missed fer sure....
> >> >> Junior calls me selfish, not that I care, yet he doesn't explain what
> >> >> makes him think I'm selfish.
> >> >
> >> >Wow...you still haven' figured out this internet thingie....
> >> Wow, you still haven't figured this "self interest" thing, even though
> >> you practice it yourself.
> >
> >Assumptions made without facts in evidence.
> Everyone acts on their self interest. Most do it regularly...

Once a selfish prick, always a selfish prick.

> >> >"Self interest is what put human beings on the top of the food chain.
> >> That's true...
> >> >I'm going that route. "
> >> You, yourself practice self interest, Dummy. I assume you make some
> >> effort to maintain your health, see a doctor, every now and then, wear
> >> a face diaper to protect yourself from Covid.
> >
> >Of course, it never occurs to a selfish prick there may be other reasons a person may want or need to maintain their health and livelyhood.
> <LOL> Well, perhaps you wore a face diaper because gibberish joe you
> to.

Or perhaps I do things like maintain my health and livelyhood because :

> IOW you selfish prick, It's not all about me, it never was, and it
> never will be.

nice glossing over that one....only more proof that your you're basically a selfish prick, and a willfully ignorantly one at that.

> You might want to reread what started this recent
> exchange for a fucking clue.
> https://groups.google.com/g/rec.bicycles.tech/c/SJRhjDxotCo/m/t4z21oU_CAAJ
> No interested in rehashing...

awwww, whattsamatter kitty? don't want your arrogant selfishness made glaringly apparent?

> >> Even the trees exert
> >> self interest. They reach for the sunlight, often blocking it out from
> >> whatever is below.
> >
> >Sure, let's conflate a non-sentient biological process human genetic imperatives. Which brings us to:
> Sex is more ofetn than not, a result of self interest.

More of that classic kitty lack of reading comprehension - I wasn't talking about sex.

> >> It seems that annoy you most when I question your grasp of logic.
> >
> >It would if you had any rational basis for it - thus far it's just more floriduh white-trash selfish bigotry and pathetically simplistic attempts at analogies.
> Sorry, I didn't intend to confuse you more...

There is little confusion that you're floriduh white-trash.

[funkma...@hotmail.com]

On Tuesday, April 18, 2023 at 8:07:46 PM UTC-4, floriduh white trash:

> On Tue, 18 Apr 2023 14:12:47 -0700 (PDT), "funkma...@hotmail.com"
> <funkma...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >On Tuesday, April 18, 2023 at 9:57:55?AM UTC-4, xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> >> On Tue, 18 Apr 2023 05:23:19 -0700 (PDT), "funkma...@hotmail.com"
> >> <funkma...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> >> >> IMHO, Socialism is the public (government) ownership and control of
> >> >> >> the business world, ie, everybody works for the government.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >Your opinion is duly noted, and dismissed as an ignorant and uninformed opinion.
> >> >> Well, that's pretty much how Marx described it...
> >> >
> >> >in your ignorant and uninformed opinion.
> >> Actually, in he and Engel's Communist Manifesto, he describes "the
> >> lower phase of communism [Socialism] as akin to the whole society
> >> organized into a single worker cooperative." So he really didn't say
> >> "government control," but, of course, the "single worker cooperative"
> >> could not function without a governing presence.
> >
> >in your ignorant and uninformed opinion.
> Just quoting Marx and Engel.. Take it or leave it.

You quote just like you cut-n-paste - no real understanding of what you quoted.

Nice glossing over this one too.....too embarrassed to admit it?

> >
> >> >That's our kitty, attempting to define the world in simple single sentences....You might want to try this, dumbass....
> >> >
> >> >Toward the Socialism of the Future, in the Wake of the Demise of the Socialism of the Past
> >> >https://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/handle/2027.42/68447/10.1177_048661349202400302.pdf;jsessionid=2F461B509813C24EB3613D5BF85F4305?sequence=2
> >> >
> >> > Economic democracy : the politics of feasible socialism
> >> >https://archive.org/details/economicdemocrac0000arch
> >> No, I'm not interested in reading socialist propaganda.
> >
> >Yeah, no sense in trying to understand the motivations of those you disagree with,
> <LOL> I really REALLY don't care what your motivations are....

iow - you're willfully ignorant and proud of it.

> > Better just to wallow in your own ignorance.
> Junior is expressing his confusion... I wonder if he does that often

No confusion in your willfull ignorance, or your selfishness. Not to mention your pathetic attempts to contradict people by deleting certain statements from their messages, then claim they never made those statements.

And you really think there's confusion over why it's obvious that you're a willfully ignorant selfish prick?

fuck off
(cue stupid <GRIN> in 3, 2, 1.....)

[Catrike Rider]

On Wed, 19 Apr 2023 02:53:53 -0700 (PDT), "funkma...@hotmail.com"
<funkma...@hotmail.com> wrote:

It's bad etiquette to post your undocumented opinion and pretend it's
a fact.

That's especially true when your opinion is so easily proven wrong..

Nov. 2, Everett, Washington: A concealed-carry permit holder
intervened to stop a mentally disturbed man who was endangering
drivers by throwing chunks of concrete and metal pipes at cars passing
by on the interstate. The man had damaged almost a dozen cars and was
holding a large piece of metal when the permit holder drew his handgun
and detained the man until police could arrive. One of the drivers
whose car was damaged told reporters that she was thankful the permit
holder saved her and other drivers from further harm.

I assumed that you had a self-interest in having a long healthy life.
Sorry, if that assumption was incorrect.

>> IOW you selfish prick, It's not all about me, it never was, and it
>> never will be.
>
>nice glossing over that one....only more proof that your you're basically a selfish prick, and a willfully ignorantly one at that.
>
>> You might want to reread what started this recent
>> exchange for a fucking clue.
>> https://groups.google.com/g/rec.bicycles.tech/c/SJRhjDxotCo/m/t4z21oU_CAAJ
>> No interested in rehashing...
>
>awwww, whattsamatter kitty? don't want your arrogant selfishness made glaringly apparent?

..by my rereading an earlier post?

>> >> Even the trees exert
>> >> self interest. They reach for the sunlight, often blocking it out from
>> >> whatever is below.
>> >
>> >Sure, let's conflate a non-sentient biological process human genetic imperatives. Which brings us to:
>> Sex is more ofetn than not, a result of self interest.
>
>More of that classic kitty lack of reading comprehension - I wasn't talking about sex.

I didn't say you were, but I assumed you had some self-interest in
sex. Sorry, if that assumption was incorrect.

[Catrike Rider]

On Wed, 19 Apr 2023 03:03:37 -0700 (PDT), "funkma...@hotmail.com"
<funkma...@hotmail.com> wrote:

>On Tuesday, April 18, 2023 at 8:07:46?PM UTC-4, floriduh white trash:

I do enjoy seeing your angry outbursts.

[John B.]

On Wed, 19 Apr 2023 05:22:31 -0400, Catrike Rider

It is, obviously, an ego thing. He needs something to elevate himself
above the hoi palloi. And, he seems to have seized on forearms about
which, unfortunately, he knows almost nothing (except that they go
bang). He used to be quite paranoid about bike helmets but he seems to
have given up on that subject, likely because no one seemed to pay any
attention to his ranting and raving. But he does seem to have adopted
mass riding as his next subject. He mentioned the other day that you
can stop at restaurants and drink water and even see new sights in a
group. I read that with a certain amount of awe as I've never had a
problem stopping at a restaurant or getting a drink of water.

[Catrike Rider]

On Wed, 19 Apr 2023 17:55:13 +0700, John B. <sloc...@gmail.com>

Krygowski rants and raves about my carrying a gun while riding a
Catrike all by myself on bike trails even though none of that has any
direct or even any indirect impact on him. The simple fact that I
reject and laugh at his "instructions" on how, when, where, etc to
ride seems to be a real thorn in his side.

How terrible it must be to be that sensitive to rejection.

[funkma...@hotmail.com]

On Wednesday, April 19, 2023 at 6:26:08 AM UTC-4, floriduh white trash wrote:
> On Wed, 19 Apr 2023 02:53:53 -0700 (PDT), "funkma...@hotmail.com"
> <funkma...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >On Tuesday, April 18, 2023 at 7:59:58?PM UTC-4, floriduh white trash wrote:
> >> On Tue, 18 Apr 2023 13:59:53 -0700 (PDT), "funkma...@hotmail.com"
> >>
> >> >
> >> >You've never heard of "women and children first"? nah, that would go against kitty saving his own ass.
> >> Uhhh, when did I imply anything like that, Dummy?
> >
> >"Self interest is what put human beings on the top of the food chain.
> >I'm going that route. "

No argument - Kitty would save his own ass before risking it for others.

> >
> >> >> >> >> >https://www.researchgate.net/publication/238212623_Culture_and_the_Evolution_of_the_Human_Social_Instincts
> >> >> >> >> >"cultural evolutionary processes constructed a social environment that caused ordinary natural selection acting on genes to favor empathetic altruism, and a tendency to direct that altruism preferentially to fellow members of symbolically marked groups. These social instincts evolved in the late Pleistocene but the radically new social institutions that have evolved in the Holocene were (and continue to be) both enabled and constrained by them"
> >> >> >> >> Like I said, humans chose to band together..
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >lol...kitty thinks instincts are a matter of choice.
> >> >> >> Self interest is itelf, instinctive. Some have called it "survival of
> >> >> >> the fittest" as coined by Herbert Spenser (SP?), an early libertarian.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >I didn't say it wasn't. I said humans have a social instinct.
> >> >> Some do, some don't. I don't.
> >> >
> >> >Some also don't have a self preservation instinct.
> >> IMO, suicides not a good thing
> >
> >No one said they were and I wasn't talking about suicide, you fucking idiot - this is why you aren't qualified to have a rational conversation.

No argument - would save his own ass before risking it for others.

> >

> >
> >It's bad etiquette to hang around the batters box after you've been struck out.
> It's bad etiquette to post your undocumented opinion and pretend it's
> a fact.

Give an example of where I posted an opinion and claimed it as fact. That's your tactic, not mine.

>
> That's especially true when your opinion is so easily proven wrong..
>
> Nov. 2, Everett, Washington: A concealed-carry permit holder
> intervened to stop a mentally disturbed man who was endangering
> drivers by throwing chunks of concrete and metal pipes at cars passing
> by on the interstate. The man had damaged almost a dozen cars and was
> holding a large piece of metal when the permit holder drew his handgun
> and detained the man until police could arrive. One of the drivers
> whose car was damaged told reporters that she was thankful the permit
> holder saved her and other drivers from further harm.

Wow....your stupidity never fails to create an impression. Here's a little thought experiment for you - I know thinking is a challenge for you, but give it a shot:
Did the fact that the good Samaritan came along have any influence whatsoever on the nut jobs decision to begin throwing things at cars? No. The incident occurred. It would have occurred regardless. The only difference was that it was stopped _after_ the incident started. Get it yet? You bike path isn't any safer because you're carrying a gun. If someone is going to fuck with you, they're going to fuck with you. The only difference is the outcome. In your case, it's just as likely that someone would back off as it is that they would snatch it from your addled old hands and beat you with it.

So, you not only didn't prove me wrong, you actually made my point for me. What you've shown to be demonstrably false is that your bike path is any safer because you're carrying a gun.

> >> >Of course, it never occurs to a selfish prick there may be other reasons a person may want or need to maintain their health and livelyhood.
> >> <LOL> Well, perhaps you wore a face diaper because gibberish joe you
> >> to.
> >
> >Or perhaps I do things like maintain my health and livelyhood because :
> I assumed that you had a self-interest in having a long healthy life.
> Sorry, if that assumption was incorrect.

Because we aren't all selfish pricks like you, as is shown by you again glossing over:

> >> IOW you selfish prick, It's not all about me, it never was, and it
> >> never will be.
> >
> >nice glossing over that one....only more proof that your you're basically a selfish prick, and a willfully ignorantly one at that.

Q.E.D.

> >
> >> You might want to reread what started this recent
> >> exchange for a fucking clue.
> >> https://groups.google.com/g/rec.bicycles.tech/c/SJRhjDxotCo/m/t4z21oU_CAAJ
> >> No interested in rehashing...
> >
> >awwww, whattsamatter kitty? don't want your arrogant selfishness made glaringly apparent?
> ..by my rereading an earlier post?

lol....sure kitty. If that's your takeaway, All it does is prove you're a willfully ignorant selfish piece of white trash.

> >> >> Even the trees exert
> >> >> self interest. They reach for the sunlight, often blocking it out from
> >> >> whatever is below.
> >> >
> >> >Sure, let's conflate a non-sentient biological process human genetic imperatives. Which brings us to:
> >> Sex is more ofetn than not, a result of self interest.
> >
> >More of that classic kitty lack of reading comprehension - I wasn't talking about sex.
> I didn't say you were,

Man...Again, your stupidity making impressions: Your response of "Sex is more ofetn than not, a result of self interest. " very clearly _does_ show you thought I was talking about sex.

> but I assumed you had some self-interest in
> sex. Sorry, if that assumption was incorrect.

I know you and the other two stooges are hung up on everyone elses sexuality, but it only goes to show you can't have a disagreement without bringing the other persons sexuality into it. Kitty making Floriduh bigots proud, yet again .

[funkma...@hotmail.com]

Interesting that you're so proud of being a willfully ignorant selfish prick.

[Catrike Rider]

On Wed, 19 Apr 2023 04:36:37 -0700 (PDT), "funkma...@hotmail.com"
<funkma...@hotmail.com> wrote:

<LOL> I see, Dummy. Your argument is that some thug might start to
attack me and seeing my gun will only make him back off.

Wait, isn't that what I've been saying? Doesn't the fact that the
thuug backs off instead of attacking to gun carriers make the gun
carrier safer?

>Get it yet? You bike path isn't any safer because you're carrying a gun. If someone is going to fuck with you, they're going to fuck with you.

Only until they see the gun.

>The only difference is the outcome.

<LOL> Which is that they don't attack me, Dummy

> In your case, it's just as likely that someone would back off as it is that they would snatch it from your addled old hands and beat you with it.

Assumes "facts" not in evidence.

>So, you not only didn't prove me wrong, you actually made my point for me. What you've shown to be demonstrably false is that your bike path is any safer because you're carrying a gun.

<EYEROLL> It's pretty clear that not being attacked makes me safer
than being attacked. Your logic is off the cliff.

>> >> >Of course, it never occurs to a selfish prick there may be other reasons a person may want or need to maintain their health and livelyhood.
>> >> <LOL> Well, perhaps you wore a face diaper because gibberish joe you
>> >> to.
>> >
>> >Or perhaps I do things like maintain my health and livelyhood because :
>> I assumed that you had a self-interest in having a long healthy life.
>> Sorry, if that assumption was incorrect.
>
>Because we aren't all selfish pricks like you, as is shown by you again glossing over:

Assumes "facts" not in evidence.

>> >> IOW you selfish prick, It's not all about me, it never was, and it
>> >> never will be.
>> >
>> >nice glossing over that one....only more proof that your you're basically a selfish prick, and a willfully ignorantly one at that.
>
>Q.E.D.
>
>> >
>> >> You might want to reread what started this recent
>> >> exchange for a fucking clue.
>> >> https://groups.google.com/g/rec.bicycles.tech/c/SJRhjDxotCo/m/t4z21oU_CAAJ
>> >> No interested in rehashing...
>> >
>> >awwww, whattsamatter kitty? don't want your arrogant selfishness made glaringly apparent?
>> ..by my rereading an earlier post?
>
>lol....sure kitty. If that's your takeaway, All it does is prove you're a willfully ignorant selfish piece of white trash.

<LOL> Assumes "facts" not in evidence.

>> >> >> Even the trees exert
>> >> >> self interest. They reach for the sunlight, often blocking it out from
>> >> >> whatever is below.
>> >> >
>> >> >Sure, let's conflate a non-sentient biological process human genetic imperatives. Which brings us to:
>> >> Sex is more ofetn than not, a result of self interest.
>> >
>> >More of that classic kitty lack of reading comprehension - I wasn't talking about sex.
>> I didn't say you were,
>
>Man...Again, your stupidity making impressions: Your response of "Sex is more ofetn than not, a result of self interest. " very clearly _does_ show you thought I was talking about sex.

No, but I mentioned it as often being a result of pursuing self
interest.

>> but I assumed you had some self-interest in
>> sex. Sorry, if that assumption was incorrect.
>
>I know you and the other two stooges are hung up on everyone elses sexuality, but it only goes to show you can't have a disagreement without bringing the other persons sexuality into it. Kitty making Floriduh bigots proud, yet again .

Sorry, I didn't realize how sensitive you are to sexual issues.

[Catrike Rider]

On Wed, 19 Apr 2023 04:38:28 -0700 (PDT), "funkma...@hotmail.com"
<funkma...@hotmail.com> wrote:

"He who angers you conquers you"

-Elizabeth kenny

https://www.thefamouspeople.com/profiles/elizabeth-kenny-7158.php

[AMuzi]

Unarmed people just bleed:

https://www.boston.com/news/crime/2023/04/17/stabbing-home-invasion-quincy-suspect-charges-police-granite-street/

--
Andrew Muzi
<www.yellowjersey.org/>
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

[Tom Kunich]

This is a pretty clear demonstration that Frank is slipping into dementia. The whole world is so simple to him - people get shot with guns so eliminate the guns and all of the problems go away. Since we know that a major symptom of vaccine side effects is a huge increase in all dementias and Frank has become Simple Simon, he is not long for this world since unlike Biden, Frank doesn't have round the clock medical care.

[Tom Kunich]

Repeatedly little Flunky demonstrates his vast courage with words at a long distance that would get his girly little teeth broken out of his head in person. But you can't expect much more from a pansy.

[Catrike Rider]

On Wed, 19 Apr 2023 06:44:45 -0700 (PDT), Tom Kunich
<cycl...@gmail.com> wrote:

It appears that Junior is pushing
Social Democracy, the modern definition being "you can't really be
free until you let the government take care of you and make all your
decisions... ....so you won't have to..."

Of course, they don't use the term "government." They say it'll be
"the people," who'll vote on where you live, where you work, how much
you make, and what you buy from the company store.

Somewhere in the definition I think there's a reference to "Kumbaya."

[Frank Krygowski]

I never scream. You're letting your imagination run wild.

Your posted "data" has had two major themes. You've given data on kids
killed in ways other than being shot to pieces at school by an AR, and
used that data to say killing a roomful of kids every couple years isn't
too bad, so we should just put up with it.

And you've given data on bullet caliber in thousandths of inches, muzzle
velocities, grains of powder, instantaneous rates of fire etc. and
implied that anyone who doesn't have all that memorized should not
comment on America's gun violence issues.

What you have NOT done is explained the benefits to society of letting
any whacko buy a gun style that's optimized for rapidly killing groups
of people. A gun style that even you have no use for.

--
- Frank Krygowski

[Frank Krygowski]

Nuts with guns kill indiscriminately.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/kansas-city-shooter-exchanged-words-ralph-yarl-opening-fire-teens-atto-rcna80033

https://www.cnn.com/2023/04/18/us/woman-shot-wrong-driveway-upstate-new-york/index.html

https://www.cnn.com/2023/03/30/us/nashville-shooting-guns-used/index.html

https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2023/04/louisville-mass-shooting-ar15-guns/

And those with guns "for defense" are more likely, not less likely, to
be shot. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2759797/

"After adjustment, individuals in possession of a gun were 4.46 (P <
.05) times more likely to be shot in an assault than those not in
possession. Among gun assaults where the victim had at least some chance
to resist, this adjusted odds ratio increased to 5.45 (P < .05)."

--
- Frank Krygowski