EAGLE Netlist conversion

On Sat, 27 Nov 2004 06:40:32 +0000, R. Steve Walz attempted to resist.
Mark Fergerson wrote:
R. Steve Walz wrote:
Two: Consequences have nothing
whatsoever to do with the philosophical question of so-called "free
will".
That's your opinion.
No. It's the truth, they are orthogonal. Consequences are what happens,
not what you do or don't do about it or why. If they were related we
could control not only what we think, but what happens, and we can't.
We can't change what we think, or even WANT to, and we can't change
its effects on others.
They are directly related; I was talking about the
consequences of choice while you're apparently talking about
the consequences of physical interactions. I see them as
being related thusly:
-----------------------
We do not have "choice".
Resistance Is Futile.

In your Newtonian metaphysics (feel free to correct my
misinterpretations/assumptions
------------------------
That this has anything to do with Newton v Einstein/QM is an unworthy
pretense. There is no such distinction in the physics, both are equally
Deterministic in sharing Theory of Science.
You Will Be Assimilated.

as you are forced by your
programming to see fit)
---------------------------
It's not "programming" in any psychological sense of it being something
one can one can "resist by effort", in fact there is NO such thing as
that.
Walz is Irrelevant. You Have Been Assimilated.

:-|
Locutus
 
On Sat, 27 Nov 2004 06:51:16 +0000, R. Steve Walz attempted to resist.

Rich The Philosophizer wrote:

On Fri, 26 Nov 2004 12:42:39 -0700, Mark Fergerson wrote:

Rich The Philosophizer wrote:

On Fri, 26 Nov 2004 04:45:25 +0000, R. Steve Walz wrote:


Mark Fergerson wrote:

R. Steve Walz wrote:


Two: Consequences have nothing
whatsoever to do with the philosophical question of so-called "free
will".

That's your opinion.

No. It's the truth, they are orthogonal. Consequences are what happens,
not what you do or don't do about it or why. If they were related we
could control not only what we think, but what happens, and we can't.
We can't change what we think,

WHAAAAAT!!????!?!?!

Who in Hell told you this? That's about the _only_ thing that you have
absolute, unconditional, iron-fisted control over. Your thoughts are
_entirely_ of your own making - there isn't anyplace else for them to have
come from.

ISTM it's a prerequisite for slave mentalities in
general. "You're incapable of making up your own mind, so
let GovernMommy do it for you".

It's more insidious than that. By denying one's own will, one cuts oneself
off from the only faculty one has with which to tell right from wrong.

;^j
Rich
---------------------------
So who do you want to stone today, bible thumpah!??
Stone is Irrelevant. Bible Thumpah is Irrelevant.

People who think they decide, think they know right from wrong.
But they don't. These are the Taliban and Al Qaeda.
Walz is irrelevant. You have been assimilated.

:-|
Locutus
 
On Sat, 27 Nov 2004 06:49:14 +0000, R. Steve Walz wrote:
Mark Fergerson wrote:
Rich The Philosophizer wrote:
On Fri, 26 Nov 2004 04:45:25 +0000, R. Steve Walz wrote:

This is Rightist paranoia, born of religious brainwashing. Religion
becomes gummint for them, a love/hate sado-masochistic
attraction/repulsion.

The question of "free will" v Determinism has nothing whatsoever to do
with some social slavery, every slavemaster knows it is comforting for
slaves to BELIEVE they control their lives.

Realizing people do not is the way OUT of slavery.
Convincing people that they do not is the perfect way to keep them
enslaved without them even knowing it. This has the fringe benefit of
dramatically lowering the cost of guards.

And it shows. The brainwashing has clearly worked as well on you as it
did on Winston Smith when he saw five lights (or whatever they were - it
was lights in Trek) and died with nothing but love for Big Brother in his
heart, or so he had been convinced.

You have been assimilated. ;-)

;^j
Rich
 
On Sat, 27 Nov 2004 06:43:08 +0000, R. Steve Walz wrote:

Rich The Philosophizer wrote:

On Fri, 26 Nov 2004 04:45:25 +0000, R. Steve Walz wrote:

Mark Fergerson wrote:

R. Steve Walz wrote:

Two: Consequences have nothing
whatsoever to do with the philosophical question of so-called "free
will".

That's your opinion.
--------------------
No. It's the truth, they are orthogonal. Consequences are what happens,
not what you do or don't do about it or why. If they were related we
could control not only what we think, but what happens, and we can't.
We can't change what we think,

WHAAAAAT!!????!?!?!

Who in Hell told you this?
-------------
No one HAD to.


That's about the _only_ thing that you have
absolute, unconditional, iron-fisted control over. Your thoughts are
_entirely_ of your own making - there isn't anyplace else for them to have
come from.
----------------
And so you fancy that your education and upbringing had nothing to do
with it at all?? Amazing. You're a simpleton.
Call me what you will, I'm just grateful I'm not you.

Good Luck in your little loop.
Rich
 
Mark Fergerson wrote:
R. Steve Walz wrote:

with renaming dogma as "Truth"

That's not a reasoned logical response, that's just cowardly
vacuous name-calling.

I don't see how any kind of "reasoned logical response"
is possible with someone who casually redefines "truth" and
"lie" for their convenience. It makes it very difficult to
map your statements to reality.
------------------------
You mean YOUR "reality", and that's why!


Of course there is, or else wecouldn't even be talking like this.

No, that's a result of cognitive mapping in what appears
to be common. Actually, we have no conception of what's
going on in each other's mind, which should have been
obvious from our first converstaion some years ago.
------------------------
No, we know full well. One has to know, or THINK they know, to
resist an idea. But resistance to something one knows comes
with one's vested interest in what they were raised to believe.


You claim there's a body of "common human experience" on
which you base the structure of your principles, yet you
will not explicate that alleged body.
---------------------------------
I don't need to, you know full well what I mean, you merely
wish to deny the notion that you'tre fully aware of.


YOU just don't LIKE me arguing from WHAT WE BOTH KNOW because
it doesn't help YOU lie!

You still have not specified any alleged experiences we
have in common.
-------------------------
Nor do I need to, everybody knows what I mean, quit pretending.


I need no such thing.

Then attempt to do so without them. Explicate precisely
what your and my experiences have in common.
----------------------
Everything we share as humans, members of a species, and that's
monstrous.


Your assumptions are fantasies not based on reality.

A solitary statement that I'm wrong does not constitute any actual
argument, nor even a convertsation, let alone a debate!

Then demonstrate exactly where your assumptions rest on
_objective_ (i. e. not subject to interpretation) reality
instead of simply asserting your beliefs to be true.
---------------------------------
What I claim are objective you will dishonestly claim are not.
The very use of the words subjective and objective was designed
for such disingenuous purposes. I assert my beliefs so that you
can understand them, I don't even NEED to claim I'm right, you'll
hate my ideas anyway if you have a political agenda to reject
truths that are inconvenient.


Assertions are fine for a non-science like mathematics,
but anything intended to have real-world utility must
eventually be shown to correlate with isolatable
observables. Even mathematicians admit that their putput
must be tested against reality. Where are your correlations?
-----------------------------
Mathmaticians can agree, math costs no one anything, but political
differences cost thieves their booty, and priests their position.


I refuse to "learn" to lie and call it truth.

Nobody is asking you to learn lies, because once you learn them
they aren't lies!

Saying frinst that Rather is right for perpetuating
falsehoods in a "good cause" is still accepting lies as truth.
---------------------
He didn't lie, and he was right, even without proof GWB's shitty
military record has been publically well-known now for 5 years.

Only the dishonest republicans choose to ignore it to preserve
their rightist windfall president. They lie to get rich.
THEY are the liars!


No, you filter everything through your preconceptions.
------------------------------
No, through the Truth filter. I have no "preconceptions"
by which term you prefer to lie and pretend I have not
fully analyzed anything.


You insist on mishearing what I say because you've assumed
that I'm Evil personified simply because I dare point out
flaws in your reaoning, some of them very basic.
------------------------------
No, you aren't able to do so, if you were I'd see something
I hadn't already thought of and dismissed for cause, and you
haven't.


Then you assume that I do so because I hate you or some
such foolishness because I use words that so easily push
your buttons. I don't know you well enough _to_ hate you. I
do know enough about the brutal, inhuman kind of Socialism
you propose to hate it, though.
-------------------------------
You call the salvation of Freedom, Fairness, Equality, and Democracy
"brutal inhuman socialism" and expect me to LIKE YOU? That sentiment
ranks you as a killable criminal in my mind!!


You don't know it all any more than anyone else does,
--------------------
My 55 years of experience tells me that's a defective assertion.
Most people are so unbelievably stupid that I wouldn't cross the
street with them.


No, just lazy and unwilling to be repetitious.

Oh, you've already tortured a Capitalist to death?
------------------------
No, but once you do once you still have to do it many more times.


Your criteria have no weight other than what you give
them; since you've provided no objective basis for
determining their valiidity, why should anyone bother to
take you seriously?

There is no "objective" basis for anything that is transferable
to an idiot like you. Truth is non-transferable, this is the
reason for killing people.

Odd, you seem to think that repetition of your premises
will result in others taking them as true.
-----------------------------------------
The more who hear, and the more ways I say it, yes, they will.
It's always worked before!! Every cause that ever existed proves it.
That *IS* what finally works.


No, the problem is that many of your "meanings" and mine
are not the same. The reason I respond is to try to get our
mutual mappings to conform to something objectively verifiable.
-------------------------------------------
The problem is always definition. Thieves call theft "working".


You are so very pompously full of shit. You completely
fail to see your substitution of rational discussion with
the assumption of evil on everyone's part but yours.

Everyone? You're lying to assert that.

Overemphasizing perhaps. What "non evildoer" percentage
of the total population do you perceive out there?
---------------------------------
It's a continuum, some are evil, some only venal, some deluded,
some confused, and some damaged, and these can ALL be true of
different people to different degrees. You take those who oppose
the repair and kill as many as you need to to stop them, then
jail as many as you can afford to, kill the worst if you run
out of room, then torture some to scare the rest into shutting
the fuck up for the rest of their life and deprive a specific
group of all political rights on a torture-death final-warning
basis.


To tak an extremely limited sample, how many
like-thinkers do you count in the sci. newsgroups hierarchy?
----------------------
I wouldn't try. It's not measurable or important.


He thought so at the time, so he wasn't lying. Lying is telling
somethingyou KNOW to be untrue.

No. He presented his source as unimpeachable with full
foreknowledge of that source's prejudices, which
conveniently matched his (and yours). Otherwise he'd have
hedged his ass off, if he'd presented anything at all. But
that would require him to attempt to be objective.
---------------------------------
He was right, just not well-documented. Everyone knows GWB's
military record is a fucking scam. So many people in west
Texas and Alabama have been threatened, killed, and bribed
that you run into roadblocks and threats investigating it!


Having a prejudice about something is _not_ the same as
"knowing" it, unless you use "know" to mean "accept without
evidence".
-----------------------
Like when the sun comes up in the east.


How long did he take to even mention that counterevidence
had been found? He waited until it was no longer deniable,
instead of reporting on it.
------------------------------
The administration had put out so much phony dummied-up crap that
nobody questioned the opposite much, smoke --> fire.

The rest of your crap on this is just more partisan dishonesty.


Nope, dictionary.
When you KNOW something isn't true, you're lying.

That's my point. He knew while he said otherwise.
--------------
Nope.


Until you do, you're NOT LYING!

Which he was.
------------------
Liar.


You don't GET to.

I see. I am not allowed to participate. I am merely to be
killed.

No, you simply don't receive tacit appointment as arbitrator of truth.

See, that's the thing; neither do you. That's why I keep
asking for objective evidence for your claims.
---------------------------
No "evidence" is needed to simply be on the side of the good and
the right, I need not prove to you or anyone that theft by the
rich is Evil and Wrong and harms other humans, and asking for such
is ridiculous, like the police asking a mugger instead of the victim
whether he actually hurt his victim. Such disingenuity is
best punished, not responded to.


I see. You have no evidence.

No one needs "evidence" for much of anything. Fully 99.9% of what
people do and believe they do based on the structural argument
in favor of it, not "evidence". History has been based on what
people did because they liked the idea, not because it was "proved".

So, you actually expect me to "like" your unsupported
claims whole-hog, and take your word for everything else?
-------------------------------------
Not till you do. That would be dishonest.
We wouldn't know whether to torture you or not.


Not gonna happen. If you've been paying attention over
the years, you'd recognize that we have many points of
agreement and a very few bones over which to contend. You
keep redefining words to maintain your position while I keep
trying to get you to see what _I_ mean without having to
redefine anything.
---------------------------
But you see, the shit in your head you believe precisely BECAUSE
you HAVE redefined a HUGE NUMBER of things from the human-normal!


You cited Godel; present your proof. I'll show you your
mistake(s).

You questioned it, show us you're not blowing it out your ass.

Quit dancing. You claimed Godel's Incompleteness Theorem
was applicable to the question of free will. Now you require
me to figure out what your proof might consist of, then
refute it. I'm not a mind-reader, nor will I do your work
for you. Present your proof if you have one. You sound so
confident that it's unassailable, it should roll easily off
your fingertips.
-----------------------------
I said: "You cannot lift yourself into the air, and you cannot
encompasse your own nature with your awareness. Any believed
control is easily proved to be illusory." Goedel proved that
any system of truth that relies on axioms, and all do, will be
incomplete, that full understanding of it is impossible, and
your entire graap of what you do in your Life and why you do
it is such a system, therefore you are NOT in either control
or correctly informed as to why it happens. Now you can jerk
around Goedel all day wheedling and conniving, many make that
their life's work, but it won't make you able to change the
tiniest thing you believe by an effort of some supposed "will".
And that gedanken experiment seals it anyway.


Nonsense, Kerry has virtually nothing to do with me anyway,

Except that you desperately wanted him to win.
--------------------
No, just that Bush would lose to ANY Democrat, I'd have been
lots happier with most of the Democrats I know. I'd've liked it
even better if a Socialist or Communist had won.


Why do you
defend him so vociferously?
--------------------
I don't.


Why hitch your wagon to his star
----------------
I don't.


if you thought no subsequent benefits to your agenda would
follow?
------------------------------
Because just preventing yours is a benefit to everyone.


According to principles easy to state.

Except that you have to redefine truth, Truth, lying, and
Lying to do so.
-------------------
*I* don't, you just mean YOU do.


What I don't like is your self-dishonesty.
---------------------
Nonense statement. No one is dishonest to themselves.


Yeah, yeah, like your desire to start a State based on
telling falsehoods for "good causes".
--------------------------------
No, just end THIS State.


The fact that American democracy is partially subverted has
nothing whatsoever to do with the rest of it that is not.

I see. Where on the literal Earth do you imagine
Democracy exists unfettered?
--------------------------------
I don't recall telling you I believed anywhere.
Nor is that important or necessary.


The fact that American issues are misrepresented by
Republicans has nothing to do with their actual Truth.

How about the similar relationship for Democrat
misrepresentations? Please don't reflexively assert that
they have none; previously you stated unequivocally that:
-----------------------------
They don't for all important intents and purposes.


the two sides are NOT the same, one is quite a bit
better (less Evil) than the other!

If you'd simply acknowledge the inherent relativism in
this statement you wouldn't have to keep scrambling to
justify your apparent absolutism in so many other areas.
--------------------------
Your partisanism is irrelevant, Democrats are SO much better
than Republicans that it justifies killing all Republicans.
Nobody even HAS to bother with your distortions.


That'd allow you to admit that Rather is a blatant liar
---------------------
He isn't.


despite his favorable (to you) political leanings, and that
Kerry is as dangerous as any other politician for reasons
specific to his and his handlers' own unpublicized agendas.
---------------------------------
You mean, of course, Equality, Fairness, and Democracy.
By dangerous, you must disingenuously mean, to the Rich!
How notional.


Then you could see that lying, for whatever "good
reason", is the insidious rust in any political structure.
-------------------------------------
Nonsense, you lie to beat an enemy. This is a War!
Peacetime is a totally different matter.


Incorporating awareness of the plain dirty fact of human
frailty is not a bug of politicoeconomic systems, but a
feature _if_ it's done preventatively. Historically none has
even come close. Your intent to treat it with a sledgehammer
will not work any better than say the Inquisition did.
-----------------------------------
The Rich would have us believe that we are as vicious and mean and
ugly as they are so we might as well bend over and let them screw
us as the devil we don't know. They're just lying to discourage
opposition.


I keep talking to you about these things not to raise
your hackles, but in hopes that you may actually do better
than what's gone before. But that can't happen until you
adopt a more realistic assessment of human nature and the
fallibility of your "heroes".
------------------------------------------
And so you imagine that someone who gets off on political torture-
execution has no grasp of human nature?? Hahahahahah! I believe that
human society must be ruled with the iron fist of absolute intolerance
of crime and that all crimes should be punishable by death. If we're
not serious about suppressing crime, then WHY THE FUCK BOTHER AT ALL??


There's your problem, trying to apply calculus to
economics.

Actually econonists have been doing that since shortly
after Leibniz
and Newton.

Leftists don't bother, they simply destroy what you fancy as
"economics". You see, what you call "economics" is merely the
machinations of organized crime to us, which should be rooted
out like cancer. Any scientific approach to what we will replace
it all with is so entirely different than your grasp of economics
that it bears no appreciable resemblance. Gone is "investment",
"interest", "principle", "speculation", etc.

Your sweeping quantization of labor=value is equally
destructive in the long run.
---------------------------------
And of course you can't actually show how or why.


Whenever that is, no one can stop an idea whose time has come.
One guy promoting it is irrelevant till the people want it, and
then they'll hunt it up like discovering a rock star in Omaha!

No. According to your own Newtonian metaphysics people
will want what they want when they want it, and nothing you
say will make the slightest whit of difference.
----------------------------------
No, in EVERY kind of physics, each particle affects every other
particle, it simply doesn't control itself.


I see. No point in showing you your own words. What
will you do, claim I edited them?

Now you're just lying and threatening to lie again.

You could save a lot of face by simply admitting that
your views evolve over time as details crop up that need to
be worked out and integrated. Sometimes that means
readjusting things all the way down to the foundation. Get
over it already.
-----------------------------
When it destroys Fairness and Equality, and Democracy, and
makes me a criminal, I'll let ya know.


Did you forget that we were talking about whether or not
your ideal economy was "finite"? We now have two sets of
otherwise identical objects, to be paid for in
hour-equivalents. Yet the "cost" of making them is different.

Nope. Cost is labor, nothing else.
Labor is the constant, the "speed of light" to economy.

Here is a widget manufactured in factory "A", using a
specific technology that requires three man-hours to make
one widget.

There is an otherwise identical widget from factory "B"
which uses better technology allowing one to be made with
only two man-hours.

How is each priced? They cannot be given the same price
arbitraily because somebody's getting screwed; either the
maker or the buyers.
----------------------------------------
One lot is priced higher than the other, then they are mixed
and their price averaged pro rata if they are the same product.

Nope, workers get paid the same for their hour, that is NOT
unfairness, they might as well be making different and
uncomparable products. WHAT they make is irrelevant. That
they are EQUAL is the ONLY relevance. Their work is NOT UPON
the product, it is FOR the People's State.


Here's a possible answer. You simply make sure that
markets are segregated so that the two products cannot be
bought at the same place, preventing "unfair competition".
That would be unwieldy because equalizing trade between the
two markets would be impossible and invite black
marketeering. Finding, processing, and "punishing" the
participants would be a waste of resources, thus this is not
to be preferred.
------------------
Okay, maybe.


Let me propose a better answer. Both are priced at the
higher wage-equivalent so that the excess for the "cheaper"
widget can go to upgrading factory "A". After both are
producing equally, the output of both can be priced at the
lower value.
---------------------------
Yes. But only if we can afford the uipgrade that year. it depends
on whether we can afford to upgrade the slower factory or not this
year.


This is not profiteering, weaseling, or sidestepping
anything. It is taking reality into account by accepting
that it simply is not possible to quantize everything
immediately and permanently; some quantities will be in a
state of flux. Investment capital, no matter what name you
give it, must be raised somehow unless the State grants
itself unlimited credit (a very dangerous practice) and what
in the current economy might be called short-term
price-gouging is a viable solution that harms no-one.
--------------------------------
There is no need to price one product higher because of that.
Better to raise ALL products a LITTLE bit.


Liar. Price is cost is labor hours. Period.
The only actual exchange between two humans that is possible is
equal labor hours, hour for hour, all else is theft.

I'm waiting to see if you had another solution in mind.
---------------------------
Equality is not going to change any time soon.


Except that you define Truth, lies, and Evil by your
preassumed values which won't hold still.
-------------------
They've been still for millions of years, it is your morality
that is in question.


If you ever get
around to re-examining them _objectively_ all those problems
will vanish.
-------------------------
Liar, disingenuous.
I'd rather make all the thieves vanish.


I make no claims other than obviousness. If the shoe fits...

Obvious to you, through your preconceptive filters. You
have no idea who I am or what I do.
---------------------
There is no "preconception", you pretend that I have some notion
that PREDATES any thinking. All you're attempting is insult, not
reason!


If you are not egalitarian, then you're a criminal, there is nothing
else you can be.

If I ain't uncritically fur ye, I'm agin ye. Where else
have I heard that lately?
----------------------------
Lessee, if you're robbing me, you're against me. Simple enough!
How do I know I'm being robbed? I work, you work, but you take
what I have. Simple.


You still haven't adressd my basic question. Suppose you
want to live elsewhere, and the local/whatever committee
thinks you're too valuable to allow to leave. What happens?

You have to train your replacement. People have to live.

Suppose like most of us, you're better at doing your job
than teaching it? Are you billed for a professional
teacher's time to train your replacement?
-----------------------------
If you can't do it someone else has to. Nawh, shit, you better
fucking learn to teach it. If you can't teach it, you weren't
doing it.


Does your Ideal Sociialism allow for volunteerism, or does
it "volunteer" your services to The State for you?

If you volunteer to study to be a doctor, or volunteer as an
emergency worker, then you are subject to the State, without
which that work for you could not exist and care of everyone
could not be offered. The State sometimes has to draft people.

Just like every other State. You'd better have a much
better system of aptitude testing than ever existed before
in place beforehand.
--------------------------
If they pass the tests they keep the job, otherwise, they're fired.


If you work at a hospital to this day and a national, state,
or local medical emergency is declared, I guarantee you will
go to work and remain there or they will come and get you with
police and give you the choice, work or jail. And it won't
matter if you try to quit, what your family plans were, or
whether it's your vacation or your day off. That's the LAW NOW!
If you don't know about this ask a cop! He has to as well!

Yes, I know that. It's also explicitly explained to
pre-med students.

You would have this apply to _all_ classes of labor?
--------------------
All critical classes.


Yet again, I must be Evil since I do not slavishly agree
with you.

Agreeing with me particularly is unimportant.
Ceding to people what they deserve by rights is their business,
and they will finally extract it from you.

Yet again, you assume I'm withholding something from
somebody.
----------------------------
Lessee, if you're robbing me, you're against me. Simple enough!
How do I know I'm being robbed? I work, you work, but you take
what I have. Simple.


Elsewhere you justify your "hoarding" by claiming
"stewardship" of the excess you admit you keep beyond your
needs. This is simple hypocrisy. Either admit it, or admit
that living in the current economy _forces_ you to
participate in "Evil" practices.
------------------------------
Disingenuous. Rightists like you want people like me to divest,
SUPPOSEDLY to prove we're serious, actually it's merely to
benefit your partisan agenda. You're the enemy.


Whether I exist or am a response engine written by a committee is
unimportant to the content I am promoting. California can do fine,
as can most areas. Trade with other regions is a luxury, not an
absolute need.

Except for fresh water, which California is way too short
of internally to support anything like its current
population or the high technology its economy depends on.
--------------------------------------
Nonsense. We simply couldn't export produce.


Not to mention a shitload of manufacuring subsectors it
--------------------------
None of this topic is relevant to anything important.


BTW, have you reconsidered your claims about the

Oh, a reminder; the bit you "accidentally" snipped out
was your misconception of the source of irrigation water for
the Imperial Valley.
-----------------------------
The "Colorado" river, which STARTS in California.
Irrelevant anyway.


Which reminds me; what will you do for electricity? You
_do_ realize that across-national-border tariffs for power
transmission are somewhat different from interstate case?
The nearest Nuke plant to you is, I think, Palo Verde here
in AZ.

No, guess again, Diablo Canyon, San Onofre, Avila Beach, and
San Clemente. And 2% of our power comes from wind farms.

Yet you're perenially short of electricity, and overuse
of air conditioning is not the culprit.
------------------------------
Actually most of it is! People keep trying to live above ground
in the central valley and desert.


You could starve and turn all your lights on.

If we kept our water, you'd have to buy more food from us
than you have to now.
------------------------------
You don't seem to grasp that desalinization with our solar flux
is easy to implement in the dry season.


Then from where comes the added capital to pay for
improvements? NOWHERE!

Costs are passed to consumers, even foreseeable future costs.

What about unforeseen costs?
--------------------------
Emergency labor authorizations and priorities, same as any society.
Quit being a nit-picking dufus.


Remember our discussion of
the dangers of JIT delivery and the need to "put things by"
for emergencies? The need to upgrade factories can hardly be
foreseen when labor-saving technologies are constantly being
invented, and nobody, not even you I hope, will seriously
consider suppressing such things in the name of "equalization".
-------------------------------------
All it has to be is equal, not "suppressed". Dummy.
We just do it all publically and democratically instead of privately
with rich people who have a perpetrual conflict, they also want to
party with the money!!


But that's not profit, that is cost. And new facilities are
costed by increase to current prices for everything. If it
were profit it would go to the rich for NO WORK. It doesn't.

I didn't use the word "profit" in my last sentence, I
said "capital to pay for improvements". Profit is where that
capital comes from in our current economy. As for public
utilities, they have to raise capital by increasing
taxation, or raising the price at which they sell the bonds
they are financed with. If fewer people buy the bonds, no
capital is available.

Mark L. Fergerson
-----------------------------
Capital is phony, it is the use of phony dollars printed by price-
gouge profiteer inflation to pretend to control the promise of extra
labor to be allocated for new and not yet productive endeavors.

It isn't at all needed or important, public democracy simply studies
labor needs and availability and allocates labor as needed with assent
of the People. There's no "market magic" that makes a bunch of amoral
rich thieves do the "right thing", usually they don't and people wind
up out of work and bad shit happens like fucking crazy! The People can
do it FAR better without venal greedy rich in the way.
Steve
 
Mark Fergerson wrote:
R. Steve Walz wrote:

How much money could be saved if citizens were allowed to keep their
own money and bank it instead of having Uncle Sugardaddy take it away
and pay 5000 parasites to give half of it back to you?

That doesn't happen.

That is exactly what happens. It's how massive
Beaureacracies perpetuate themselves.
-------------------------
Nonsense, nobody takes the money home, if they do it's prison for them.

Actually, the parasites are the Wealthy.


You mean "I refuse to acknowledge that beaureaucracies
are a parasite class
----------------------
Since they are paid a wage like yours to do what the People asked,
none of them are by definition any kind of "parasite", all the
parasites are the wealthy!


Just don't allow them to come into existence. Mechanize
everything Governmental, and rotate the operators so nobody
starts thinking of it as their "turf".
---------------------------
So nobody knows what's going on so the profiteers can steal it all.


What actually happens to it is it flows toward the rich and
away from you. And banks are how they do it.

Sigh. Right after hanging all the lawyers, stone the
bankers? How about stuffing my own damn mattress? Or do you
now equate all saving with "hoarding"?
----------------------------------------
Saving money is hording. No savings or savable money should
exist, wage must chase goods, housing is owned free and clear
and retirement is state-paid.


Won't you ever get over your "up against the wall"
mindset? What motivation have your defined classes of
"criminals" for improving things?
-----------------------------
The Rich Criminals have PREVENTED most human advancement, we'd
be on the Moon, half the nation would be reforested, we'd live
on mostly professionally hunted game, everyone would own their
home by now and not rely on petroleum and we'd have 300 mph bullet
trains that were a quarter the price of planes by now.

-Steve
--
-Steve Walz rstevew@armory.com ftp://ftp.armory.com/pub/user/rstevew
Electronics Site!! 1000's of Files and Dirs!! With Schematics Galore!!
http://www.armory.com/~rstevew or http://www.armory.com/~rstevew/Public
 
YD wrote:
On Sun, 21 Nov 2004 07:28:23 GMT, "R. Steve Walz" <rstevew@armory.com
wrote:

So when are you going to get off your dead ass, kwitcherbellyachin,
and do something about it?

Dumb Fuck.

Good Luck!
Rich
-------------
I am, shithead. You start by talking.


For how long have you been talking, and for how much longer will you
keep talking before finally getting off your ass and actually do
something about it? You know, Viva La Revolución and all that.

- YD.
------------
Talking is HOW it is done, stupid.

-Steve
--
-Steve Walz rstevew@armory.com ftp://ftp.armory.com/pub/user/rstevew
Electronics Site!! 1000's of Files and Dirs!! With Schematics Galore!!
http://www.armory.com/~rstevew or http://www.armory.com/~rstevew/Public
 
On Sat, 27 Nov 2004 05:53:17 GMT, Blair P. Houghton <b@p.h> wrote:

Jim Thompson <thegreatone@example.com> wrote:
On Thu, 25 Nov 2004 21:21:46 GMT, Blair P. Houghton <b@p.h> wrote:
Jim Thompson <thegreatone@example.com> wrote:
On Mon, 22 Nov 2004 00:56:21 GMT, Blair P. Houghton <b@p.h> wrote:

Jim Thompson <thegreatone@example.com> wrote:
Don't waste your money supporting the French enemy. Buy American or
Aussie !-)

Your money doesn't support the French anyway. At least, not
more than 70% of what it used to, ever since George "Economic
Disaster" Bush took over the dollar.

"So your $300 bribe from the Junta
is worth only $210 now. And it only
cost 1200 American lives. Happy?"

Poor clueless Democrat. Are you having any trouble buying _anything_
at a good price?

Yes; I can't seem to find a Republican with any integrity anywhere.

"Oh, and I'm not a Democrat."

Ooooh! Ooooh! Kidney punching!

No, that one was in the throat. These would be in the kidneys:

Poor clueless Democrat. Are you having any trouble buying _anything_
at a good price?

Meat.
Oil.
Houses.
Cars.
Tomatoes.
Leading-edge video cards.
Auto insurance.
Health insurance.

--Blair
"But lottery tickets aren't going up, so
the American Dream is still within all
our reach..."
I suppose you blame "W" for bad weather ruining the tomato crop?

And, IIRC, you live out here in my neighborhood in the Foothills. No
more land (and Californicators moving in) does have a way of raising
house prices... something like +25% in the last year.

For attaining the rest of your list might I suggest working for a
living ;-)

...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, P.E. | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona Voice:(480)460-2350 | |
| E-mail Address at Website Fax:(480)460-2142 | Brass Rat |
| http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |

I love to cook with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food.
 
On Sat, 27 Nov 2004 08:54:07 -0700, Jim Thompson wrote:

On Sat, 27 Nov 2004 05:53:17 GMT, Blair P. Houghton <b@p.h> wrote:

Poor clueless Democrat. Are you having any trouble buying _anything_
at a good price?
^^^^^^^^^^^^

Meat.
Oil.
Houses.
Cars.
Tomatoes.
Leading-edge video cards.
Auto insurance.
Health insurance.
....
I suppose you blame "W" for bad weather ruining the tomato crop?

And, IIRC, you live out here in my neighborhood in the Foothills. No
more land (and Californicators moving in) does have a way of raising
house prices... something like +25% in the last year.

For attaining the rest of your list might I suggest working for a
living ;-)
Well, you can work until you drop, but that doesn't make the prices any
better.

Thanks,
Rich
 
On Sat, 27 Nov 2004 18:45:58 GMT, Rich Grise <rich@example.net> wrote:

On Sat, 27 Nov 2004 08:54:07 -0700, Jim Thompson wrote:

On Sat, 27 Nov 2004 05:53:17 GMT, Blair P. Houghton <b@p.h> wrote:

Poor clueless Democrat. Are you having any trouble buying _anything_
at a good price?
^^^^^^^^^^^^


Meat.
Oil.
Houses.
Cars.
Tomatoes.
Leading-edge video cards.
Auto insurance.
Health insurance.

...
I suppose you blame "W" for bad weather ruining the tomato crop?

And, IIRC, you live out here in my neighborhood in the Foothills. No
more land (and Californicators moving in) does have a way of raising
house prices... something like +25% in the last year.

For attaining the rest of your list might I suggest working for a
living ;-)


Well, you can work until you drop, but that doesn't make the prices any
better.

Thanks,
Rich
I don't think prices are high, except maybe gasoline, but it's still
cheaper than milk ;-)

...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, P.E. | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona Voice:(480)460-2350 | |
| E-mail Address at Website Fax:(480)460-2142 | Brass Rat |
| http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |

I love to cook with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food.
 
On Sat, 27 Nov 2004 16:43:42 -0300, YD wrote:

On Sat, 27 Nov 2004 08:54:06 GMT, "R. Steve Walz" <rstevew@armory.com
wrote:

YD wrote:

On Sun, 21 Nov 2004 07:28:23 GMT, "R. Steve Walz" <rstevew@armory.com
wrote:

So when are you going to get off your dead ass, kwitcherbellyachin,
and do something about it?

Dumb Fuck.

Good Luck!
Rich
-------------
I am, shithead. You start by talking.


For how long have you been talking, and for how much longer will you
keep talking before finally getting off your ass and actually do
something about it? You know, Viva La Revolución and all that.

- YD.
------------
Talking is HOW it is done, <snip insult>.

-Steve

Really doesn't answer the question, does it? But OK, let's go for that
for the moment. Talking to whom and for how long? Any operational
plans on how to go about the big change-over or whatever you'd like to
call it?
I'm here to tell you, boys & girls, it hasn't worked for me yet!

Or has it? ?;->
--
The Pig Bladder From Uranus, still waiting for
some hot babe to ask what my favorite planet is.
 
On Sat, 27 Nov 2004 08:54:06 GMT, "R. Steve Walz" <rstevew@armory.com>
wrote:

YD wrote:

On Sun, 21 Nov 2004 07:28:23 GMT, "R. Steve Walz" <rstevew@armory.com
wrote:

So when are you going to get off your dead ass, kwitcherbellyachin,
and do something about it?

Dumb Fuck.

Good Luck!
Rich
-------------
I am, shithead. You start by talking.


For how long have you been talking, and for how much longer will you
keep talking before finally getting off your ass and actually do
something about it? You know, Viva La Revolución and all that.

- YD.
------------
Talking is HOW it is done, <snip insult>.

-Steve
Really doesn't answer the question, does it? But OK, let's go for that
for the moment. Talking to whom and for how long? Any operational
plans on how to go about the big change-over or whatever you'd like to
call it?

- YD.

--
Remove HAT if replying by mail.
 
Jim Thompson <thegreatone@example.com> wrote:
On Sat, 27 Nov 2004 05:53:17 GMT, Blair P. Houghton <b@p.h> wrote:
Jim Thompson <thegreatone@example.com> wrote:
On Thu, 25 Nov 2004 21:21:46 GMT, Blair P. Houghton <b@p.h> wrote:
Jim Thompson <thegreatone@example.com> wrote:
On Mon, 22 Nov 2004 00:56:21 GMT, Blair P. Houghton <b@p.h> wrote:
"So your $300 bribe from the Junta
is worth only $210 now. And it only
cost 1200 American lives. Happy?"

Poor clueless Democrat. Are you having any trouble buying _anything_
at a good price?
Yes; I can't seem to find a Republican with any integrity anywhere.
"Oh, and I'm not a Democrat."
Ooooh! Ooooh! Kidney punching!
No, that one was in the throat. These would be in the kidneys:
Meat.
Oil.
Houses.
Cars.
Tomatoes.
Leading-edge video cards.
Auto insurance.
Health insurance.

I suppose you blame "W" for bad weather ruining the tomato crop?
You asked. I answered. You belittled the facts.
But that is how the Republican party works.

"Facts are stupid things."-Ronald Reagan

Facts are to be obfuscated, derided, distorted, denied,
evaded, and invented to suit the persuasive goal.
They are not to be respected as indicators of reality.
Reality interferes with the sophistry that underpins all
of Conservative political philosophy.

And, IIRC, you live out here in my neighborhood in the Foothills. No
more land (and Californicators moving in) does have a way of raising
house prices... something like +25% in the last year.

For attaining the rest of your list might I suggest working for a
living ;-)
You might, but since I've been working for a living since
I was 13 years old, you'd be pissing into your own face.

Milk is now $4 a gallon, bread $3 a pound, and unless you
make my kind of money, you can forget steak exists.

And yes, Bush is responsible for the continuing decline in
the value of the dollar, as it is falling along with the
world's confidence that America will remain solvent, which
is compounded by the rate at which Bush is running up our
debt with no means of repaying it.

--Blair
"It's called 'gutting the company
before you torch the warehouse'."
 
"Blair P. Houghton" wrote ...
And yes, Bush is responsible for the continuing decline in
the value of the dollar, as it is falling along with the
world's confidence that America will remain solvent, which
is compounded by the rate at which Bush is running up our
debt with no means of repaying it.
50 years of profilgate Democrat spending on entitlements
completely beyond the scope of the Federal government
put us in hock up to our ears. Federal spending on national
defense is precisely the reason the federal government
exists. The only way to wean the congresscritters off the
crack cocaine of tax revenues and pork is to starve them
and hope the tax-n-spenders succumb and fade into ignomy.
We can thank "The Great Society" and its like for artificially
diddling the economy for the subsequent excursions of the
semi-damped resonant system.
 
On Sat, 27 Nov 2004 21:09:57 GMT, Blair P. Houghton <b@p.h> wrote:

Jim Thompson <thegreatone@example.com> wrote:
[snip]
For attaining the rest of your list might I suggest working for a
living ;-)

You might, but since I've been working for a living since
I was 13 years old, you'd be pissing into your own face.

Milk is now $4 a gallon, bread $3 a pound, and unless you
make my kind of money, you can forget steak exists.
I have a filet at least once per week, and eat out (non-fast food)
probably 5 times per week ;-)

And yes, Bush is responsible for the continuing decline in
the value of the dollar, as it is falling along with the
world's confidence that America will remain solvent, which
is compounded by the rate at which Bush is running up our
debt with no means of repaying it.

--Blair
Naaah! It's subtle, maybe too deep for you. Keep an eye out and
watch what happens to the European economy.

...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, P.E. | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona Voice:(480)460-2350 | |
| E-mail Address at Website Fax:(480)460-2142 | Brass Rat |
| http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |

I love to cook with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food.
 
Blair P. Houghton wrote:
And yes, Bush is responsible for the continuing decline in
the value of the dollar, as it is falling along with the
world's confidence that America will remain solvent, which
is compounded by the rate at which Bush is running up our
debt with no means of repaying it.
The Senate and House of Representatives write the bills, the
President either signs them into law, or doesn't, his choice.

Our budget, as always, was created and passed by congress.

-Chuck

--Blair
"It's called 'gutting the company
before you torch the warehouse'."
 
On Sat, 27 Nov 2004 12:19:11 -0700, Jim Thompson wrote:
On Sat, 27 Nov 2004 18:45:58 GMT, Rich Grise <rich@example.net> wrote:
On Sat, 27 Nov 2004 08:54:07 -0700, Jim Thompson wrote:
On Sat, 27 Nov 2004 05:53:17 GMT, Blair P. Houghton <b@p.h> wrote:
Poor clueless Democrat. Are you having any trouble buying _anything_
at a good price?
^^^^^^^^^^^^
....
For attaining the rest of your list might I suggest working for a
living ;-)
Well, you can work until you drop, but that doesn't make the prices any
better.
I don't think prices are high, except maybe gasoline, but it's still
cheaper than milk ;-)

OK, I have an excues then - I don't drink milk. But two-fifteen a gallon
is still a Hell of a lot more than thirty-two nine, so howcome the
Republicans let _that_ one get all out of line?

Eisenhower kept prices down, by golly by gosh by gum!

;^j
Rich
 
On Sat, 27 Nov 2004 21:11:16 +0000, Blair P. Houghton wrote:


Jim Thompson <thegreatone@example.com> wrote:

I don't think prices are high, except maybe gasoline, but it's still
cheaper than milk ;-)

Gasoline is actually about 50% cheaper than it should be,
if oil prices were any factor in it.

The question is, why haven't gas prices hit $3/gallon,
now that oil is 100% more expensive?
Probably because the cost of refining, distributing and taxes is
a larger percentage of the cost of a gallon of gasoline than is the
cost of the crude oil.

-Chuck
 
"Clarence" <no@No.com> wrote in message news:<fFsnd.19855$zx1.9933@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com>...
"Pig Bladder" <pig_bladder@anyspammer.org> wrote in message
news:pan.2004.11.19.19.08.59.881936@anyspammer.org...
On Fri, 19 Nov 2004 07:26:27 -0700, Jim Thompson wrote:

On Thu, 18 Nov 2004 23:44:59 -0700, Brian Hance
brian@net-prophet.com> wrote:

[snip]

For the record, I don't care for the french government. They are
every bit as craven and two faced as our current administration. The
current fad by those on the right of shit-hammering the french for
every little thing though certainly seems like there are some out
there with some kind of weird inferiority complex though. I mean,
heaven forbid that other countries look out for their best interest
rather than ours.

I have no problem with nationalism, but bad mouth the US and we'll cut
off your balls.
...Jim Thompson

It's amazing the harm you dupes are willing to do just to be "right."


You can't harm a Frenchie by cutting off his balls, he doesn't play soccer
anyway, so he doesn't have any balls.
Ever heard of Zidane?

Definately in the FIFA top 10 of all international level players
today. The french suck but when it comes to soccer they rank among the
best.
 
Pig Bladder wrote:
On Sat, 27 Nov 2004 06:53:11 +0000, R. Steve Walz wrote:

So give it away and torture yourself to death, since
that's your oft-prescribed punishment for excessive
accumulation of material wealth.
-----------------------------
I'm on the side of good, so I'm a steward of that source
of wealth for the collective, and I spend what I don't
deserve on change.

And you were told this by....?
----------------------------------
My conscience.

Would this also be the one that tells you to kill everybody that
doesn't obey your rules?
------------------------
Conscience is what tells you to kill people who steal from you.
Your robber will, of course, disagree; he's a robber, after all.
This doesn't mean you need concern yourself with his lying.

What you so fancifully and dishonestly pretend are just "my" rules
are THE rules. Ones that every human knows in their heart of hearts.

If someone evicts you from your home, you get your neighbors together
and kill him.

-Steve
--
-Steve Walz rstevew@armory.com ftp://ftp.armory.com/pub/user/rstevew
Electronics Site!! 1000's of Files and Dirs!! With Schematics Galore!!
http://www.armory.com/~rstevew or http://www.armory.com/~rstevew/Public
 

Welcome to EDABoard.com

Sponsor

Back
Top