Jihad needs scientists
in [Design]
|
From: John Fields on 21 Nov 2006 11:33 On Tue, 21 Nov 2006 15:26:43 +0000, Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > >jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: > >> Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >> >jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: >> >> unsettled <unsettled(a)nonsense.com> wrote: >> >> >jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: >> >> > >> >> >Most of the European and Brit construction I've seen >> >> >involves masonry. They have no appreciation for the >> >> >wood frame construction that makes up the bulk of >> >> >US housing, let alone advantages and disadvantages. >> >> >> >> But that doesn't explain it. They have to repoint masonry >> >> in order to keep up maintenance. Their cracks are bigger >> >> than mine ever will be. >> > >> >Repointing is quite rarely needed. Cracks are pretty rare here. >> >> What about air pollution? That eats mortar around here. > >There's no significant air pollution here. Britain was the first country AFAIK >to introduce clean air legislation around 50 yrs ago. --- I guess that's why John Lennon wrote: .... "Sitting in an English garden waiting for the sun if the sun don't come you get a tan from standing in the English rain"... -- JF
From: Phineas T Puddleduck on 21 Nov 2006 13:45 In article <45631AB3.27909278(a)hotmail.com>, Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > There's no significant air pollution here. Britain was the first country AFAIK > to introduce clean air legislation around 50 yrs ago. Smog and the 50's as I recall? -- Thermodynamics claims another crown! http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/heacon.html -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
From: krw on 21 Nov 2006 14:53 In article <45627BEB.84FBDD47(a)hotmail.com>, rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com says... > > > krw wrote: > > > rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com says... > > > jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: > > > > krw <krw(a)att.bizzzz> wrote: > > > > >jmfbahciv(a)aol.com says... > > > > > > > > >> But are the towns allowed to own the stuff or do they > > > > >> have contract out to a telco? > > > > > > > > > >I don't know if the towns will own it or there is a not-for-profit > > > > >coop that owns the equipment, but the towns are organizing the > > > > >effort at doing the required permits. They're also paying the tab. > > > > > > > > It is beginning to look like internet, or rather, web access, > > > > is becoming a town utility service, like water, power, and road > > > > plowing. > > > > > > 'Town utilities' seem to be a US concept. > > > > In some places, yes. > > > > > Over here individual towns don't get usually involved in commercial businesses. > > > One notable exception here is Hull's telecoms yet I have no idea why it's just > > > them. > > > > Cities in your hole don't have things like roads? > > Local roads are the responsibility of the local town/city/district council ( local > government). > Major roads are the responsibilty of the county council ( local government ) > Motorways are the direct responsibilty of the Department of / for Transport ( > national government ) > > They don't run commercial utilities though. You don't have city water and waste treatment? > The one exception being Kingston Communications. > http://www.kcom.com/aboutus/ourhistory.shtml So you lied again. -- Keith
From: krw on 21 Nov 2006 15:42 In article <ejtv5q$9su$1(a)blue.rahul.net>, kensmith(a)green.rahul.net says... > In article <MPG.1fcae9c9199518f8989c01(a)news.individual.net>, > krw <krw(a)att.bizzzz> wrote: > >In article <ejqve0$fgo$2(a)blue.rahul.net>, kensmith(a)green.rahul.net > >says... > >> In article <6af58$455ba5ff$4fe75f7$20998(a)DIALUPUSA.NET>, > >> unsettled <unsettled(a)nonsense.com> wrote: > >> [.....] > >> >The original error starts with you two clowns failing to > >> >appreciate that capitalism has a soul. > >> > >> (Boggle) Capitalism is a cold hard logical system. > >> > >> > To define a term > >> >"fair profit" isn't beyond the capacity of capitalism to > >> >embrace freely and without external (read governmental) > >> >imposition. > >> > >> It is beyond the capacity of capitalism to define what "fair profit" > >> really means. > > > >Nonsense! Capitalism perfectly defines what is fair; did someone > >pay the fair market value? If so, it is by *definition* fair. If > >not it is not "fair". > > No, there are situations where the market does not work. Drugs are an > example. You do not have the choice of going with a different drug if > only the patented one will save your life and you don't have the option of > waiting. That makes the market is not free since you are under duress. Name one. > >> Is it 7% or 15%? > > > >Who cares, other than someone who wants to control others lives? > > I don't want to control others lives. I want to prevent others from > controlling. You say. Your actions speak differently. > >> More importantly, who gets to decide and > > > >Exactly! > > Yes, exactly. Who. The market, dummy. It is the only "fair" arbiter. > Do the shareholders in a company decide that it is ok > if half the people who catch some disease die because that it the price > point the maximizes the stock value? Does the CEO of the company or the > marketing department? It is a question of who decides who's life is not > worth saving. Examples, please! > >> how do you deal, in the short term, with those who choose not to make only > >> a "fair profit"? > > > >Apparenlty you think *you* should be the arbiter. ...sounds > >totalitarian to me! > > No, you have suggested that the market will deal with it. It doesn't. It certainly does! > How do you propose to solve the problem? There are lots of things that > the market doesn't do well. For those we form governments. You can have > tyranny in many forms. One is where corporations control everything. There are things in life that aren't directly monetary, for those we have governments. > [....] > >> The specific example of drug pricing is a better example. Nobody dies > >> because they didn't use a Microsoft OS. > > > >Maybe some do because... > > So far I don't think there has been a proven case. Industries that use > computers for things that could kill you usually have standards that rule > out Windows. Like the cruiser a couple of years back? > > > > >> >Even then, competitive products emerge. > >> > >> "emerge" implies a length of time. In the case of drugs, you may just > >> have to wait for the patent to run out. > > > >...or use an older drug that may be perfectly fine. WHy anyone > >would listen to drug ads on the TeeVee is beyond me! > > What if the new drug is the only one that will save the life and there is > no older one? Name a case. -- Keith
From: Michael A. Terrell on 21 Nov 2006 18:33
krw wrote: > > Why? McDonalds pays real money. They offer real benefits. Why > wouldn't kids learn how to handle money by being employed? It's > certainly better than learning to live off the government! A kid I know has just finished a year working at a Wendy's restaurant. He has bought a used pickup truck, and a used motorcycle. He helps support his disabled mother, and he only graduated from high school, earlier this year. He has matured a lot in the past year, something that the demented donkey really should try. The first couple months he was wasting his money, but that changed fairly fast. His talk of a fancy stereo system, and other useless toys is gone, and he is trying to save some money for his future. -- Service to my country? Been there, Done that, and I've got my DD214 to prove it. Member of DAV #85. Michael A. Terrell Central Florida |