Re: Lessons

[Guest guest]

Everybody believes in Democracy these days, but you believe in

bureaucracy. I don't have to agree on it and I don't have to agree to

disagree with you either. Until you get past this mental block in your head

I am not just going to ignore every assinine thing you say. What makes you

expect that I should allow you to voice your opinion without me being able

to voice mine? I can't stop you from saying anything, except my name, while

you, Pete Watts can't stop me from saying anything either. I don't know who

the NeoTech or Pupship is.

You ask me whose ass tastes better, as if Mr Gates hasn't used your

beloved system every step of the way in constructing his empire. A system

with holes will be taken advantage of until the holes are fixed, so I thank

Mr Gates for being bright enough to notice them and take advantage of them,

all the more quicker they will be fixed (one hopes). No thanks to you for

trying to build more holes in the system. You have the typical bureaucrat

talk - when there is light at the end of the tunnel its time to build more

tunnel.

Re: Lessons

> Obviously anonymous coward you have no more brains than the Neo-Tech

> maniac does.

>

> Do you REALLY think any of you jerks is ever going to be persuaded by

> anything that I might say? The Lord Almighty and Einstein could

> expalin it to you in babytalk and you still wouldnt get it. Of course

> youre not, so what is the point of trying you dumbfuck?

>

> I discussed Ayn Rand civilly, at length, with " Pupship " a long time

> back, and we agreed to disagree. I was the first to abuse Dave but he

> is an obvious nut. You came out with that " brown-nosing " stuff

> without provocation, because I believe in DEMOCRACY and a decent

> sociey where the vulnerable are guaranteed help.

>

> Tell me, which tastes better, Rand's ass or Bill Gates'?

>

> Now, as these flame wars do NOT achieve anything, do yout

> counter-abuse thing and I will NOT answer it.

>

>

>

> > > >

> > > > > I smeared

> > > > > total LAISSEZ-FAIRE capitalism, that produces corporate giants

> > > like

> > > > > the aforementined compaies which it is widely considered

> exploit

> > > > their

> > > > > monopolies in a manner which ensure that the consumer does NOT

> get

> > > > the

> > > > > best value at the least cost.

> > > >

> > > > So you consider that some gun-backed controls are good for the

> > > > economy? Maybe have gun-toting bureaucrats impede certain

> aspects of

> > > > business? That is a mixed economy, and that is what we have

> today.

> > > > Such an economy impedes businesses, reducing their efficiency,

> and

> > > > causing the prices of goods and services to climb ever higher

> thus

> > > > leaving the poor unable to afford even basic items like a home

> and

> > > > automobile.

> > > >

> > > > Look at the facts: in 1970 the cost of an average house was

> $30,000

> > > > and car was $3,000. Today, the equivalent house costs $130,000

> and

> > > > car costs $30,000. Why the dramatic increase in price? Because

> > > > government got itself entangled into the economy -- where it

> does

> > > not

> > > > belong -- and reduced the efficiency of business with a plethora

> of

> > > > regulations and subjective laws. Cost of materials, labor, and

> > > > production steadily rose, which resulted in exorbitant prices

> for

> > > > consumers.

> > > >

> > > > Now look at the unregulated computer industry: in 1970 a super

> > > > computer cost $300,000 dollars and up. Today, you can buy a

> computer

> > > > for $3,000 or less...and it has a greater capacity then the

> super

> > > > computers of the early 1970s. Why the dramatic decrease in

> price?

> > > > Because inept politicians and bureaucrats could not figure out

> how

> > > to

> > > > entangle the newly burgeoning computer industry with the burdens

> of

> > > > arbitrary regulations and subjective laws.

> > > >

> > > > Your mixed economy with government intervention can only cause

> > > prices

> > > > to skyrocket, thereby reducing the standard of living for

> everyone.

> > > > But laissez-faire capitalism with its free competition can only

> > > cause

> > > > prices to fall toward the free, thereby increasing the standard

> of

> > > > living for everyone.

> > > >

> > > > Hunter

> > > > http://www.localgroup.net/public

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 1/25/01 6:05:30 PM Pacific Standard Time,

egroups@... writes:

<< is right. Rand disliked libertarians because they used her

political assertion of " prohibiting the initiation of physical force "

without accepting her ethical and epistemological ideas.

DH

>>

well i'll be damned. Ya learn something new every day. Piper