Jihad needs scientists
in [Design]
|
From: T Wake on 24 Nov 2006 10:09 <jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message news:ek6ou2$8ss_001(a)s989.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com... > In article <ek5994$t07$4(a)blue.rahul.net>, > kensmith(a)green.rahul.net (Ken Smith) wrote: >>In article <4565B911.11BF2263(a)hotmail.com>, >>Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >>[...] >>>How many communist economies exist worldwide ? >> >>Zero if you round off to the nearest whole number. > > One, two, three, and I don't know much about how countries > in Africa are faring after the USSR became a fUSSR. Almost no impact. USSR had very little sway over Africa. > I'm not sure how some of the less known Muslim countries > that were a part of the USSR are working. Fine. I take it you mean the newly capitalist countries which have Islam as the national religion.
From: unsettled on 24 Nov 2006 10:10 jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: > In article <4565BA66.1AE61881(a)hotmail.com>, > Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > >> >>jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: >> >> >>>I'm told >>>that a successful socialist economy is in Sweden. I have to study >>>that. >> >>It's called social democracy. > > > I know. The fact that the word democracy has to be included gives > me a slight warning. > > >>All of the European 'lbour' parties embrace the >>concept more or less. > > > Yes and that's a serious problem when independent thinking > and action is required. > > >>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_democracy >> >>" The prime example of social democracy is Sweden, which prospered > > considerably > >>in the 1990s and 2000s [1]. Sweden has produced a strong economy from sole >>proprietorships up through to multinationals (e.g., Saab, Ikea, and > > Ericsson), > >>while maintaining one of the longest life expectancies in the world, low >>unemployment, inflation, infant mortality, national debt, and cost of living, >>all while registering sizable economic growth. " > > > What bothers me about this is that there is only a few companies. > There are many ways to measure cost of living. If they included > all the taxes it would be very high. There have been usenet discussions over the years regarding IKEA's practice of buying goods from far eastern firms which specialize in the use of child labor.
From: T Wake on 24 Nov 2006 10:11 <jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message news:ek6p6d$8ss_003(a)s989.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com... > In article <4565BA66.1AE61881(a)hotmail.com>, > Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >> >> >>jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: >> >>> I'm told >>> that a successful socialist economy is in Sweden. I have to study >>> that. >> >>It's called social democracy. > > I know. The fact that the word democracy has to be included gives > me a slight warning. Blimey. Is the US a democracy? Does representative democracy carry the same warning or is it just the word "social" which causes you to come out in hives? >> All of the European 'lbour' parties embrace the >>concept more or less. > > Yes and that's a serious problem when independent thinking > and action is required. Far from the truth. All realistic scientists embrace GR, yet this does not impede independant thinking. >> >>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_democracy >> >>" The prime example of social democracy is Sweden, which prospered > considerably >>in the 1990s and 2000s [1]. Sweden has produced a strong economy from sole >>proprietorships up through to multinationals (e.g., Saab, Ikea, and > Ericsson), >>while maintaining one of the longest life expectancies in the world, low >>unemployment, inflation, infant mortality, national debt, and cost of >>living, >>all while registering sizable economic growth. " > > What bothers me about this is that there is only a few companies. > There are many ways to measure cost of living. If they included > all the taxes it would be very high. Not true. You are simply continuing to find irrelevant things with which to try and dispute other peoples findings.
From: unsettled on 24 Nov 2006 10:14 jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: > In article <MPG.1fcf9771c508b2b6989c41(a)news.individual.net>, > krw <krw(a)att.bizzzz> wrote: > >>In article <ek1q41$ucf$1(a)leto.cc.emory.edu>, lparker(a)emory.edu >>says... >> >>>In article <ek1equ$8ss_003(a)s853.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com>, >>> jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: >>> >>>>In article <ejv29u$vbq$2(a)leto.cc.emory.edu>, >>>> lparker(a)emory.edu (Lloyd Parker) wrote: >>>> >>>>>In article <1164101047.711452.220630(a)f16g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>, >>>>> |||newspam|||@nezumi.demon.co.uk wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>unsettled wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>Ken Smith wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>In article <MPG.1fcae9c9199518f8989c01(a)news.individual.net>, >>>>>>>>krw <krw(a)att.bizzzz> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>In article <ejqve0$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". >>>>>> >>>>>>There is no "fair" market price. There is only the price that one >>>>>>particular individual is willing to pay for the specific goods or >>>>>>services. If you want some fun try comparing how much you have paid for >>>>>>an airline seat on a scheduled flight with your neighbours. And don't >>>>>>get too upset if you find that one of them has paid half what you did >>>>>>for the same journey and ticket. >>>>>> >>>>>>Willing seller willing buyer. If you don't like the price you are not >>>>>>compelled to buy it. >>>>> >>>>>Water after a natural disaster. Monopolies. There are many examples > > where > >>>>>unbridled capitalism is just plain wrong. >>>> >>>>Have you considered that people should plan ahead? >>>> >>>>/BAH >>>> >>> >>>Have you considered compassion? Caring (about more than money, that is)? >> >>It's not particularly caring nor compassionate to force money from >>one person to give it to another. The Salvation Army and even the >>Red Cross seemed to do a bit better than the USG in the past couple >>of disasters. > Red Cross isn't any good either. It's run with a government model. > The Walmarts and other retail did the best. People should be > wondering why and then take another look at all social programs > not managed well by governments. Because they limit themselves to management skills rather than embracing people with entrepreneurial skills. snip
From: jmfbahciv on 24 Nov 2006 10:10
In article <in2cm29d5u5scibag25ssob3v54865cs3u(a)4ax.com>, Jonathan Kirwan <jkirwan(a)easystreet.com> wrote: >On Thu, 23 Nov 06 15:09:03 GMT, jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: > >>In article <3n49m217v6elta45n7or12e7o8g9q7764b(a)4ax.com>, >> Jonathan Kirwan <jkirwan(a)easystreet.com> wrote: >>>On Wed, 22 Nov 2006 18:05:52 -0000, "T Wake" >>><usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> wrote: >>>><jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message >>>>news:ejus5u$8ss_006(a)s861.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com... >>>>> In article <ejsl9k$9gs$12(a)leto.cc.emory.edu>, >>>>> lparker(a)emory.edu (Lloyd Parker) wrote: >>>>>>In article <ejs81b$8qk_001(a)s952.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com>, >>>>>> jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>In article <ejr4o4$k7c$3(a)blue.rahul.net>, >>>>>>> kensmith(a)green.rahul.net (Ken Smith) wrote: >>>>>>>>In article <ejhpc1$8qk_001(a)s938.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com>, >>>>>>>> <jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>In article <ejckm3$mf9$1(a)blue.rahul.net>, >>>>>>>>> kensmith(a)green.rahul.net (Ken Smith) wrote: >>>>>>>>>>In article <ejcg0c$8ss_016(a)s858.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com>, >>>>>>>>>> <jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>[.....] >>>>>>>>>>>I see the consequences just fine. Forcing, by law, everyone >>>>>>>>>>>to have insurance is the latest idiocy. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>If you are going to have an insurance based system and not let the >>>>>>>>>>dead >>>>>>>>>>bodies of those without insurance clutter the streets, you really need >>>>>>>>>>to >>>>>>>>>>make sure everyone has insurance. If you don't then an irresponsible >>>>>>>>>>fraction of society can become a burden on the rest. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>The same problems will still exist. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>No, the irresponsible people will not longer be a burden. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> So everybody has a piece >>>>>>>>>of paper that says "insurance". That will not create any >>>>>>>>>infrastructure needed to deliver the services. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>Agreed but if you wish to hang onto an insurance based system rather >>>>>>>>than >>>>>>>>a NHS like system, this is a completely seperate problem. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>I don't want either. Insurance should be only for extraordinary >>>>>>>circumstances. Instead what we have is a "insurance" that is >>>>>>>expected to pay for everything. As a result, it does pay for >>>>>>>everything and becomes a Ponzi scheme. >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>My employer offers both -- an insurance plan with low premiums and very >>>>>>high >>>>>>deductibles and copays (and so for extraordinary circumstances) and one >>>>>>with >>>>>>higher premiums and lower deductibles anc copays (and thus pays for more >>>>>>routine things). Choice is good. >>>>> >>>>> Choice is very good. An NHS will eliminate choice. >>>> >>>>How? >>>> >>>>> Watch the >>>>> politics and administrations of Massachusetts' latest brain >>>>> fart. We'll see what methods the politico social workers use >>>>> to force all of us to have insurance. >>>> >>>>Interesting concepts. >>> >>>Don't forget to look at Oregon, which has a medicaid waiver and >>>provides an Oregon Health Plan that is a means-tested medical and >>>dental plan for anyone who can meet the criteria. I expect to see it >>>expanded under the new Democratic leadership here. >> >>Have they the brass balls to invoke a penalty on your income tax >>form if you don't "volunteer" and sign up for those programs? > >Hmm? I don't understand the question. According to the news reports of a law passed by our state legislature, if we don't have health insurance we will pay a penalty that will be collected via our income tax forms. I still do not know how this is going to be implemented because they haven't sent me my 2006 forms and instructions yet. I'll find out in two months...whoa!...six weeks. > >>I have yet to hear anybody help about this step to a dicatorship; >>it is very worrisome. > >You must be an idealist Libertarian or something. No. There are functions that governments need to do. > As I've mentioned >here earlier, I grew up working the fields as a child to make the >money I needed to eat, lived in a home without walls, begged for food >at grocery stores, and I did NOT have medical care. Yes, I know. In our state, your family would have been called migrant workers. When I picked blueberries there was a family who lived on the blueberry farm every year during the season. > There is NO >possible excuse for a society such as ours with children growing up as >I did, after my father died. It's inexcusable. Period. > >It has nothing to do with dictatorship. It has everything to do with >being compassionate. Something, perhaps, you lack? And honey, before your shout poor to me, you had better check out my shoes. By what I've written so far, you have enough thinking ability to figure out that I was in a similar economic class as you were. The difference between you and me is we didn't move with the crops' growing season. /BAH |