Jihad needs scientists
in [Design]
|
From: jmfbahciv on 28 Nov 2006 08:16 In article <456C2DE4.695D7D0C(a)hotmail.com>, Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > >jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: > >> Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >> >jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: >> >> Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >> > >> >> Do you really want >> >> me to believe that it's her fault that your citizry still >> >> can't be self-sufficient without government handouts? >> > >> >The issue of self-sufficiency is entirely another matter. What do you do when >> >there's a shortage of jobs ? 4 million short in Thatcher's days ( around 10% >> >unemployment ). >> >> You stop duct-taping the thumbs of the people who know how >> to create wealth. > >You reckon ex-mine workers are entrepreneurs ? All 100,000 of them ? Nope. You'ld need only a 100 of them to create new work. All of them are very capable of doing work outside thoes mines. Miners have skills that middle-income city slickers never learned. All those workers needed was permission to go out and work. Union rules kept them idle. /BAH > > >> You stop governmental support for unions >> who refuse to close money-losing job sites. > >There never was any government support for unions. The issue wasn't about >loss-making either. > > >> You stop supporting >> people so they need to work in order to buy stuff. You stop >> trying to run all business, manufacturing, and startups and let >> non-political people do that work. > >How do you find 4 million jobs 'overnight'. > >The fact of the amttter is that Thatcher deliberately made them unemployed as a >political tactic. > >Graham >
From: jmfbahciv on 28 Nov 2006 08:17 In article <456C2E21.87E1BD0D(a)hotmail.com>, Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > >jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: > >> "Edward Green" <spamspamspam3(a)netzero.com> wrote: >> > >> >Amazing! That was post 10873. All nicely archived in Google, so that >> >future generations may not lose one word. >> >> I worry about that. One little buyout and the whole archive can >> be gone. > >It already has been bought out. > >It was deja.com before google. And do you know what's been lost because of that buyout? /BAH
From: jmfbahciv on 28 Nov 2006 08:19 In article <1164717848.709456.45960(a)14g2000cws.googlegroups.com>, hill(a)rowland.org wrote: > Winfield Hill wrote: >> Winfield Hill wrote: >>> Michael A. Terrell wrote: >>>> Winfield Hill 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. Certainly it's a stress >>>>> test for the Google Groups web-page display code, etc. >>>> >>>> Never have so many, said so much, about so little! ;-) >>>> >>>> I heard of one long flame war that passed 10K posts, >>>> but I never found out which newsgroup. >>> >>> We passed 9000 on the 14th, and are now within 100 posts >>> of 10,000. Keep up the good work guys, you can do it! >> >> Google Groups is having a little trouble with this long thread. >> The message-heading list said there were 9999 posts, so >> I hoped to make the 10,000th post, but upon loading all the >> article references in the left sidebar, it showed more than >> 10,050 posts, so I missed the opportunity. >> >> But, good job guys and gals, over 10,000 posts, and still >> going strong. And still on topic more or less. I've only >> read a smattering of the posts here and there, and there's >> a minimum of flaming SFAICS. Nice to see. > > Still going strong, over 11,300 posts, no sign of slowing. A next test would be restoring a piece of the archive. How long are the ..hmmmm......I can't think of the word... address list backtrace? I thought there had been a limit of 256 characters in the newsgroup spec. /BAH
From: jmfbahciv on 28 Nov 2006 08:24 In article <ekevue$abg$1(a)leto.cc.emory.edu>, lparker(a)emory.edu (Lloyd Parker) wrote: >In article <ek9f58$8ss_002(a)s894.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com>, > jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: >>In article <ek7d1r$r6e$22(a)leto.cc.emory.edu>, >> lparker(a)emory.edu (Lloyd Parker) wrote: >>>In article <ek6p6d$8ss_003(a)s989.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com>, >>> 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. >>>> >>>>/BAH >>>How about "quality of life"? The US usually ranks near the bottom of >western >>>nations. Why must it always be about money to right-wingers? >> >>I am getting more and more convinced that this "quality of life" >>comparison is getting to mean no obligation to make one's own decisions. > >No, it means things like life span, infant mortality, literacy, incidence of >cancer, retirement security, etc. > >>A high QoL means no decisions at all. This is getting to be more >>in line with the way Islam works. >> >>/BAH > >And right-wingers value lives only for the $$ they bring in. YOu can avoid that by making a chocie. You cannot plan if the only choices are death or sub-servience. /BAH
From: unsettled on 28 Nov 2006 08:37
jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: > In article <456C2E21.87E1BD0D(a)hotmail.com>, > Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > >> >>jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: >> >> >>> "Edward Green" <spamspamspam3(a)netzero.com> wrote: >>> >>>>Amazing! That was post 10873. All nicely archived in Google, so that >>>>future generations may not lose one word. >>> >>>I worry about that. One little buyout and the whole archive can >>>be gone. >> >>It already has been bought out. >> >>It was deja.com before google. > > > And do you know what's been lost because of that buyout? Actually? IMO the best of usenet. |