Jihad needs scientists
in [Design]
|
From: jmfbahciv on 8 Nov 2006 08:26 In article <1162901489.499250.295790(a)e3g2000cwe.googlegroups.com>, hill(a)rowland.org wrote: >Winfield Hill wrote: >> >> 4200 postings and still going strong. Amazing. > > Wow, now 7200 posts and still going strong. And most > of the posts were under the original subject title. This > must be some kind of a record. I don't think so. >Certainly it's a stress > test for the Google Groups web-page display code, etc. KEWL!!!! Has there been any glitches? /BAH
From: jmfbahciv on 8 Nov 2006 08:29 In article <45510F80.783D41CB(a)hotmail.com>, Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > >T Wake wrote: > >> "Eeyore" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message >> > T Wake wrote: >> >> <hill(a)rowland.org> wrote in message >> >> > Winfield Hill wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> 4200 postings and still going strong. Amazing. >> >> > >> >> > Wow, now 7200 posts and still going strong. And most >> >> > of the posts were under the original subject title. This >> >> > must be some kind of a record. Certainly it's a stress >> >> > test for the Google Groups web-page display code, etc. >> >> >> >> I suspect there is no "end state" for the remaining die hard >> >> participants. >> >> Some (unsettled) have arrived late and do little but insult, but for the >> >> rest ... well it could go on for some time ... >> >> >> >> I was wondering how this would affect GoogleGroups. I seem to remember >> >> its interface was clumsy for anything more than about 100 post threads. I >> may >> >> have to check it out there :-) >> > >> > Clumsy is putting it mildly ! >> > >> > 7185 posts on Google currently. >> >> Nice - one more now :-) > >I just checked. Google shows 7268 now. Darn. This is the end of the thread. There used to be a word used by the hippies that described contemplation of one's navel. Posting about the count of posts is a runaway null job. /BAH
From: jmfbahciv on 8 Nov 2006 08:32 In article <Ve14h.8295$B31.5452(a)newssvr27.news.prodigy.net>, <lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net> wrote: > ><jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message >news:eipt9a$8qk_003(a)s900.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com... >> In article <einm2q$4me$1(a)blue.rahul.net>, >> kensmith(a)green.rahul.net (Ken Smith) wrote: >>>In article <ein6vl$8qk_002(a)s943.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com>, >>> <jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote: >>>[....] >>>>My state is going to have an all Democrat political system with >>>>no checks nor balances. The guy running for governor is promising >>>>to break the 2.5% property tax mandate, eliminating the high >>>>school graduation test, increase the income tax (against >>>>another taxpayer mandate), and somehow thinks that all this >>>>new tax income will create jobs. >>> >>>What is he going to spend the money on? >> >> AFAICT, raising taxes. > >He's going to spend the money raising taxes....riiiiiight. Yup. > You really do >need to learn how government works. You really do need to notice how Mass. works. If you spend oodles of money to study the effects of lower taxes, you have to keep the tax rate high to pay for all of those studies (and their attendants "expenses"). It's a beautiful CATCH-22. /BAH
From: jmfbahciv on 8 Nov 2006 08:44 In article <eirk14$qa6$5(a)blue.rahul.net>, kensmith(a)green.rahul.net (Ken Smith) wrote: >In article <eipt9a$8qk_003(a)s900.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com>, > <jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote: >>In article <einm2q$4me$1(a)blue.rahul.net>, >> kensmith(a)green.rahul.net (Ken Smith) wrote: >>>In article <ein6vl$8qk_002(a)s943.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com>, >>> <jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote: >>>[....] >>>>My state is going to have an all Democrat political system with >>>>no checks nor balances. The guy running for governor is promising >>>>to break the 2.5% property tax mandate, eliminating the high >>>>school graduation test, increase the income tax (against >>>>another taxpayer mandate), and somehow thinks that all this >>>>new tax income will create jobs. >>> >>>What is he going to spend the money on? >> >>AFAICT, raising taxes. >> >>> If it is an improved >>>infrastructure, it is likely he is right. >> >>But these people don't spend the monies on infrastructure. >>It seems like everything gets dumped into the general fund >>which is a black hole. > >Where does the money really go? "the general fund" is an accounting >device not the final destination of the money. Patronage pockets. Extending all infrastructure projects 2 or 3 decades. The so-called social services. Building disintegrating buildings. > >> >>> A lot of states have roads that >>>are in disrepair and have to live with railway level crossings on high >>>traffic roads. If the infrastucture issues have been a drag on industry, >>>it is very likely that increased taxes to pay for increased spending on >>>them is exactly what is needed. >> >>Before any taxes get increased, I want to see the current tax >>colletions spent on infrastructure. There is no evidence that >>new monies will be spent wisely. There is tons of evidence >>that it won't since these people don't use the current revenues >>for infrastructure. > >Where are they spending the money. You can't stop to make a new fire >truck while putting out a fire. The way we bought our firetruck was to approve an override. The locals paid for it. Dukakis put a cap on the distribution of the lottery monies. The only reason the lottery was approved was to redistribute all its money throughout the school system. Instead he put a cap on it and the rest of money when into the "general fund" so that the state's books would look good enough to stay in the B bond classifiaction..or whatever is one level above the junk bond level. That cap has never been taken off. AFAICT, most of the general fund seems to go into employees bank accounts for having their name on an office door. They don't even have open the door to collect. The state is terribly corrupt. It's so bad that the legislature doesn't even enforce taxpayer mandates which were passed into laws. The latest (and there are so many of them) insanity was Question 2 on our ballot yesterday. It was an attempt to make the state political system a one-party system. That stinks of dictatorship that is already corrupted. /BAH /BAH
From: Ben Newsam on 8 Nov 2006 08:27
On Wed, 08 Nov 2006 04:25:39 -0600, unsettled <unsettled(a)nonsense.com> wrote: >You're amazing. You answer the first half of my sentence >while taking it out of context by purposely ignoring the >second half, all the while displaying your rage at having >been caught out. The only person displaying rage is you. I think you have comprehensively insulted just about every other poster to this thread. |