This is topic Liberalism- by P.E. Trudeau in forum The Flameboard at Flare Sci-Fi Forums.


To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://flare.solareclipse.net/ultimatebb.php/topic/11/534.html

Posted by Saltah'na (Member # 33) on :
 
For those who don't know, one of Canada's former Prime Ministers passed away a week ago. On the day Pierre Elliot Trudeau retired as Prime Minister of Canada after 16 years in power (as well as from public life), he gave the following speech. Let's see what you think.
http://www.thestar.com/thestar/back_issues/ED20001007/opinion/20001007NAR01_NR-SPEEC H.html

P.S.: Anyone making mention of whatever fiscal deficit incurred during his years in power will be sorely bushwhacked with a large slab of Canadian Maple. Policies are not the question here.

------------------
"My Name is Elmer Fudd, Millionaire. I own a Mansion and a Yacht."
Psychiatrist: "Again."

[This message has been edited by Tahna Los (edited October 08, 2000).]
 


Posted by Omega (Member # 91) on :
 
I think liberals in Canada are obviously completely different from our liberals. Those sound more like conservatives.

------------------
"The power of accurate observation is commonly called cynicism by those who have not got it."
- George Bernard Shaw


 


Posted by The_Tom (Member # 38) on :
 
<aside>Actually, Tahna, I always found it funny that while Trudeau ran up a big debt in Canada by being a spendhappy liberal, the oh-so-amazingly-awesome conservative Republicans in the US ran up, proportionately speaking, just as big, if not a bigger debt. And we in Canada got a nice public health care system with all the trimmings and all sorts of other groovy social programs like a better education system, and all the Americans got was, um... well, rid of a few socialist regimes in a few small countries, a lot of nuclear weapons, and a huge gap between rich and poor.</aside>

I can't see how a lot of the stuff in that speech is conservative. Ahem...

quote:
They [Liberals] do not seek to equalize everybody. They do ensure that equality of opportunity is there for all . . . They confront the powerful. They confound the secure.

Considering that American conservatives...

(a)...insist there already is equal opportunity in the US thanks to the oh-so-holy Constitution and therefore any form of affirmative action is wrong, and that actively fighting to ensure equality of opportunity is inherently useless.

(b)...rather than confront the powerful, allow them to pay for their political conventions (Yup, gotta love the fact that the Philadelphia convention was overwhelmingly bankrolled by Tobacco and Oil companies)

(c)...hold that the secure are secure beacuse they're good and the ideal for all society. They don't let the thought enter their minds that many of the so-called "secure" are actually greedy pigs who stay secure by downtrodding on the insecure. Therefore appeasing rather than confounding the secure is their agenda.


I can't see Trudeau as, by any stretch of the imagination, being a conservative of any shape, size, color or texture. Sorry. I'm afraid the the following is not an equality:

"Good politician concerned about the rights and freedom = conservative"

------------------
"...I was just up in Canada, Toronto actually. You know, they really hate you guys [Americans] up there? The funny thing is, they think you hate them back, when in fact, you just couldn't be bothered to care. Now in Ireland, it's a different story. At least we had the common decency to wait until the English invaded before we started hating them. I guess the Canadians are hating you in advance..."
-Irish Comic Ed Byrne on Canada-US relations


[This message has been edited by The_Tom (edited October 13, 2000).]
 


Posted by Omega (Member # 91) on :
 
"Yup, gotta love the fact that the Philadelphia convention was overwhelmingly bankrolled by Tobacco and Oil companies"

Oh, yes, the EEEVIL tobacco and oil companies! Guess I'd better change my party registration, eh?

Did it ever occur to you that those companies support the GOP because the opposition is unfairly targeting them for destruction? Oh, no, when people with ANY ammount of money get involved with politics, they HAVE to be bribing people to change their views, instead of supporting those who's existing views help them.

"rather than confront the powerful"

You assume that the powerful NEED to be confronted. The only "powerful" entity that has actual power over you is, guess what?, the GOVERNMENT. By your reasoning, we should give MORE power to an entity that can harm us, so that they can combat entities that can't. Illogical.

"They don't let the thought enter their minds that many of the so-called "secure" are actually greedy pigs who stay secure by downtrodding on the insecure."

Marx couldn't have said it better himself. Add to that the fact that you both could stand a class in basic economics, and you have a lot in common with him. You see the rich as parasites on the "working class" (as if the majority of the upper class don't work, anyway). That analogy is nothing CLOSE to right.

What good does it do ME to prevent someone else from getting ahead? Conversely, what good is it going to do me for the upper class to have the snot taxed out of them? It has no direct effect on ME. As for indirect effects, when the successful are punished, it discourages others from being successful. It kills initiative. If the owner doesn't make any amount of money any more, who pays the workers? Go get a good book on trickle-down theory. You could use one.

"the oh-so-amazingly-awesome conservative Republicans in the US ran up, proportionately speaking, just as big, if not a bigger debt"

It was the Democrats that ran up the national debt. Check the records. They controled congress between '80 and '92 (and yes, I know that the GOP had the senate for a couple years in the early 80's, but spending bills start in the house), when the debt was created.

------------------
"The power of accurate observation is commonly called cynicism by those who have not got it."
- George Bernard Shaw


 


Posted by The_Tom (Member # 38) on :
 
And Messrs. Nixon and Reagan didn't veto them? Oh dear. I was under the distinct impression that their economic policies were the cornerstones of their rule. (Especially the latter.) So "Reaganomics" didn't actually exist because all the financial regulation of the US was done by the evil Dems during that time period, and Reagan had no control over what they were passing...

News to me.

But I digress.

As to your accusations of me being a Marxist and having no knowledge of economics, I'm sure that Smith and Malthus would love you to do lunch and talk about economic ideas that are equally-out-to-lunch as Marx's. And don't say I have no knowledge of economics. From what I've seen over the last few years, your economic knowledge must have been culled from a book entitled "Reagan and God: The lost conversations between the Lord and His prophet of Economic Piety."

I'm not all for workers of the world uniting and all that other stuff. I'm not a Marxist, but an educated and open-minded Canadian university student with my own personal ideas of how best to run society. If you want to call me a Liberal, than do so, because it's as close as you can get to my thinking. But don't assume that everyone who doesn't hold conservative ideological views is an adherent to an extinct econo-political philosphy that had a nasty totalitarian streak in it.

If you assert that there is a direct correlation that exists in our society between wealth and usefulness, there isn't. If you assert that there is a direct correlation that exists in our society between wealth and the amount of work one does, there isn't. Not to say that capitalism is evil. But to say it has flaws that a well-meaning government can iron out, often to the great dissatisfaction of those who have been held in a "secure" position by their economic dominance.

Visionaries like Trudeau felt that government wasn't an evil force, but an institution of the public, with responsibilities to defend the public interest. I hope you don't believe it's in the public interest to have a society where downright unethical tobacco execs make a business of spreading their addicitive and posionous goods to the public in an unchecked manner. Especially after conspiring with one another to cover up evidence of their product's harmful effects from the public, and by extension the government. I hope you don't believe that their interference in the democratic process by buying a political party its convention is an important step in curbing the power of the government, and by extension the public.

I'm beginning to suspect that Omega was repeatedly violated as a child by some evil and vindictive civil servant. His innate fear of government activity that extends anywhere beyond the realm of justice and national defence could only has arisen in that fashion, as could his view that government is a nasty and powerful force that has to be stood up to by the valiant forces of big business in the name of freedom for all.


------------------
"...I was just up in Canada, Toronto actually. You know, they really hate you guys [Americans] up there? The funny thing is, they think you hate them back, when in fact, you just couldn't be bothered to care. Now in Ireland, it's a different story. At least we had the common decency to wait until the English invaded before we started hating them. I guess the Canadians are hating you in advance..."
-Irish Comic Ed Byrne on Canada-US relations

[This message has been edited by The_Tom (edited October 13, 2000).]
 


Posted by Omega (Member # 91) on :
 
"And Messrs. Nixon and Reagan didn't veto them?"

Oh, don't get me started on Nixon. He completely screwed up the economy with his price controls. Don't ask me how Reagan got his tax cut past the Dems. I'm not familiar with Hill politics four years before I was born.

"As to your accusations of me being a Marxist..."

Did I call you a Marxist? I must have missed that...

And since that pretty much wipes out the basis for the next two paragraphs...

"If you assert that there is a direct correlation that exists in our society between wealth and usefulness, there isn't."

Of course there's not. A direct corrolation would mean that this is the case ALL THE TIME. As it is, there are maybe three percent of the wealthy who actually inherited it, and of course a VERY small fraction that got it dishonestly. But the vast majority earned it flat out.

"Visionaries like Trudeau felt that government wasn't an evil force, but an institution of the public, with responsibilities to defend the public interest. I hope you don't believe it's in the public interest to have a society where downright unethical tobacco execs make a business of spreading their addicitive and posionous goods to the public in an unchecked manner."

Of course I don't. But I don't think it's the government's job to DEFINE the public interest. Using that same logic, they could just as easily say that it's not in the public interest for me to be dissing the government, and arrest me. That's like saying, "Hey, it's OK to cheat on your significant other under certain circumstances. And YOU get to choose the circumstances." It's the same flawed argument that supports "relative morality". You may as well NOT have rules, because either way, you're placing your trust in nothing more than the good will of someone under constant temptation.

"I hope you don't believe that their interference in the democratic process by buying a political party its convention..."

And this interferes in democracy how? Oh, yeah, can't have someone supporting the cantidate that helps them, can we?

Final paragraph is drivel. Ignored.

------------------
"The power of accurate observation is commonly called cynicism by those who have not got it."
- George Bernard Shaw


 


Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
 
Now now, let's not get all Malthusian, or I'll start having dreams about the corn laws again. Creepy.

------------------
love's function is to fabricate unknownnness
--
E. E. Cummings
****
Read chapter one of "Dirk Tungsten in...The Disappearing Planet"! And party everyday.

 


Posted by Saltah'na (Member # 33) on :
 
Let me have a crack on some of these comments. I will comment Omega's points since they challenge Tom's, and I will comment on both points of view accordingly.

"Did it ever occur to you that those companies support the GOP because the opposition is unfairly targeting them for destruction? Oh, no, when people with ANY ammount of money get involved with politics, they HAVE to be bribing people to change their views, instead of supporting those who's existing views help them."

Point one for Omega. Yes, he DOES have a point. But whether or not whatever present government is targeting them for destruction is unfair can go both ways. Like say, I could charge them with criminal negligence, if they knew beforehand that they were putting out a product that could kill people, and enhancing that same product with more stuff that could keep people hooked on smoking, thus killing them even quicker.

We're talking unethical and unmoral Business practices. And that does justify the destruction of a company. Morally, AND by law, that is.

"You assume that the powerful NEED to be confronted. The only "powerful" entity that has actual power over you is, guess what?, the GOVERNMENT. By your reasoning, we should give MORE power to an entity that can harm us, so that they can combat entities that can't. Illogical."

Omega, for CHRIST sakes, please stop saying that the government is harming society. Government is supposed to act as the mediator between all classes of people, whether it is different races, different shapes, and different classes.

I am hoping that you believe that the Government is not the only harmful entity out there. There are other businesses who sometimes may have more power than the government. To your credit, Omaga, these are the so-called companies who "support parties whose existing views help them", which sort-of nullifies my point. But when these big companies tell the government to do certain things which could possibly harm society as a whole (whether it be health, environment, or education), and when the government complies with their requests, over the overwhelming opposition of the common folk, THEN we have a problem here.

Keep in mind that the last paragraph was based on ONTARIO politics. I will submit that I do not know if such things happen in the US.

"Marx couldn't have said it better himself. Add to that the fact that you both could stand a class in basic economics, and you have a lot in common with him. You see the rich as parasites on the "working class" (as if the majority of the upper class don't work, anyway). That analogy is nothing CLOSE to right."

Yes the rich do work, to their credit. Now to back Tom's point, they "stay secure by downtrodding on the insecure". They do this by suggesting the government do things that, as I said in my last paragraph, are against the wishes against the common folk. These are the same people who maintain that the rich pay less tax than the poor. These are the same people who don't care when their paycheques are getting a fat bonus, while their lower class workers are receiving pink slips to increase their so-called botton line. These are the same people who don't see something wrong when the gap between the rich and the poor are growing to insurmountable heights, while they suggest that social services, designed to help the lower class, be cut beyond all recognition. These are the same people who suggest policies about making private universities and hospitals so that the rich can pay for first rate education and healthcare, while the lower class gets anything lower than substandard (AKA two-tiered Health and Education).

Again, Ontario policies only. Don't bash me simply because I'm inferring to whatever chaos is happening up here.

"What good does it do ME to prevent someone else from getting ahead? Conversely, what good is it going to do me for the upper class to have the snot taxed out of them? It has no direct effect on ME. As for indirect effects, when the successful are punished, it discourages others from being successful. It kills initiative. If the owner doesn't make any amount of money any more, who pays the workers? Go get a good book on trickle-down theory. You could use one."

That last two sentences is mudslinging. That being aside, its not being about punishing those who are successful. It's about "listen, I know you're making oodles of money, so could you spare some so we can give some other people a helping hand? That's what we're here for." Now I still say "helping hand", not "free cake".

Taxes should NEVER be too high. Do that and you frighten away business. But then, Taxes should NEVER be too low. Do that, and you have no aids to help the less fortunate, no aids to fund hospitals, no aids to fund utilities, no aids to fund schools, and so on.

If you ever heard of Walkerton, Ontario, then I suggest you look that up. Six people died from drinking contaminated water. The initial report suggested negligence, but there is also evidence that the local water commission did not have the necessary money to make repairs, tests, and inspections to the filtering equipment. That money used to be funded by the government, but went up in smoke when the Conservative government cut off all funding to pay for an ill-advised Tax cut.

"Did I call you a Marxist? I must have missed that... And since that pretty much wipes out the basis for the next two paragraphs..."

Not necessarily, give him a benefit of a doubt.

"Of course there's not. A direct corrolation would mean that this is the case ALL THE TIME. As it is, there are maybe three percent of the wealthy who actually inherited it, and of course a VERY small fraction that got it dishonestly. But the vast majority earned it flat out."

The point that Tom is trying to make is how to justify the bonus that a CEO gets while lower class workers are being laid off at the same time. If a company is trying to make profit, they must cut overhead. And that overhead must exist in all sectors of the business, NOT just the lower class workers.

If you were working at a company, and they laid you off, and you find that the CEO gets a bonus the size of your annual salary, you'd be pissed off too, right?

"Of course I don't. But I don't think it's the government's job to DEFINE the public interest."

Point, Omega. But the government is supposed to represent the public interest, they are supposed to walk a balance between all sorts of groups, between the rich and the poor. That was Trudeau's vision. Business groups may have hated him for doing that, but it appears that the majority of Canadians (aside from a few Quebeckers who were unfortunately involved in the FLQ crisis) didn't.

"And this interferes in democracy how? Oh, yeah, can't have someone supporting the cantidate that helps them, can we?"

Again, point, Omega. I feel that there is nothing to comment here.

As for Tom's last paragraph, drivel indeed. But I'd like to ask why Omega speaks so coldly about the government, and was there a past experience involved. I'm not inferring that there is, but Tom's remarks made me question the existence of one.

*PHEW* finally finished.......

------------------
"My Name is Elmer Fudd, Millionaire. I own a Mansion and a Yacht."
Psychiatrist: "Again."

[This message has been edited by Tahna Los (edited October 15, 2000).]
 


Posted by Omega (Member # 91) on :
 
"Like say, I could charge them with criminal negligence, if they knew beforehand that they were putting out a product that could kill people, and enhancing that same product with more stuff that could keep people hooked on smoking, thus killing them even quicker."

Not when there are warnings on the packs, you can't. People who start smoking have every opportunity to know what they're getting into. If I know that a substance is dangerous, and use it anyway, it's my own darned fault.

"Omega, for CHRIST sakes, please stop saying that the government is harming society."

I didn't say that. I said they CAN. The government is the only entity that has the power to actually force you to do anything. I'm not willing to simply trust them not to excercize it.

"These are the same people who don't see something wrong when the gap between the rich and the poor are growing to insurmountable heights"

"Insurmountable" is a poor choice of words.

"while they suggest that social services, designed to help the lower class, be cut beyond all recognition."

No one down here is suggesting this that I've heard.

"These are the same people who suggest policies about making private universities and hospitals so that the rich can pay for first rate education and healthcare, while the lower class gets anything lower than substandard (AKA two-tiered Health and Education)."

Funny thing, then, that these are the same people who support school vouchers, which give the poor access to the first-rate education...

"It's about "listen, I know you're making oodles of money, so could you spare some so we can give some other people a helping hand? That's what we're here for."

No, see, that's making the government seem like a voluntary charity. It's more about "Listen, you've got WAY more money than you need. Fork some over or we put you in jail."

As for your example, of course it can be taken too far. Cutting spening and taxes is good, but only if done responsibly.

"If you were working at a company, and they laid you off, and you find that the CEO gets a bonus the size of your annual salary, you'd be pissed off too, right?"

Companies don't lay off workers just to give higher-ups a bonus. That'd be stupid, and business owners aren't stupid (at least, not the successful ones). If they lay off workers, they have a reason. Namely, that they're not needed any more for whatever reason, or that they're not doing their job as well as needed. I SERIOUSLY doubt that you could find an instance where some poor sap is fired, specifically to give the boss a bonus.

"But I'd like to ask why Omega speaks so coldly about the government, and was there a past experience involved."

Nope, no traumatic audits when I was six, nothing like that. I just don't like having a ANY chance of someone being able to force me to do something, and my having no chance at stopping them. I take ANY threat to me and mine quite seriously, especially when the chances of it happening are incalculable, and when it doesn't take all that much to be prepared.

------------------
"The power of accurate observation is commonly called cynicism by those who have not got it."
- George Bernard Shaw


 


Posted by Vacuum robot lady from Spaceballs (Member # 239) on :
 
So, are you, like, angry at your Mom all the time? 'Cuz I think she could make you do stuff, like wash your face, Or you get no supper. That's a threat.

quote:
Not when there are warnings on the packs, you can't. People who start smoking have every opportunity to know what they're getting into. If I know that a substance is dangerous, and use it anyway, it's my own darned fault.

How recently did they put warnings on the packs? I think the people who started before this have a legitimate beef. Smokers are shit, anyway.

------------------
"...you know, Omega, there's a phrase you might want to look up. It goes something like "paranoid arrogant fuckwit who has more chance of ejaculating to the moon than he has of ever convincing a girl that he's a viable prospect for marriage." -PsyLiam, September 16, 2000 10:23 PM.

[This message has been edited by Ultra Magnus (edited October 15, 2000).]
 


Posted by Jeff Raven (Member # 20) on :
 
I feel I agree with a bunch of Omega's points. As for why I would speak coldly about the government:

My father makes $40,000. He has(had) 4 kids, a wife and a grandmother to take care of too. But according to the government, my dad was 'rich,' and didn't deserve very many tax breaks, nor did he qualify for any government programs to help. I myself have to pay 20% taxes, and I think its too much.

------------------
Intelligence, Integrity, Responsibility.
Vote Bush/Cheney 2000


 


Posted by Omega (Member # 91) on :
 
"So, are you, like, angry at your Mom all the time? 'Cuz I think she could make you do stuff, like wash your face, Or you get no supper. That's a threat."

Things don't work quite that way around my home. My mom can't ORDER me to do anything. I simply tend to defer to her superior experience. Ever since I was four, if she told me not to do something, I had to have a reason. If I don't like the reason, well, forget that, I'm doing it anyway. She tends to give in once I see that she's being irrational.

"How recently did they put warnings on the packs?"

Seventies, was it? Just a guess...

"I think the people who started before this have a legitimate beef."

Well, of course. But as a side note, you can't sue them for untold billions of dollars. They didn't do THAT much damage.

And if I read this correctly, Jeff, your dad pays NOTHING under the Bush tax plan. Good call.

------------------
"The power of accurate observation is commonly called cynicism by those who have not got it."
- George Bernard Shaw


 


Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
 
"Things don't work quite that way around my home. My mom can't ORDER me to do anything. I simply tend to defer to her superior experience. Ever since I was four, if she told me not to do something, I had to have a reason. If I don't like the reason, well, forget that, I'm doing it anyway. She tends to give in once I see that she's being irrational."

Okay, Omega has now made me scared about having children. If someone who was home-schooled, had two parents, and was installed with a good sense of religious morals from a young age still turned out to be a bit of a twat, what hope have any of us got?

(I should point out that I don't mean that. I love Omega. I really do. Although I do get tempted to stuff him full of straw and position him outside my house to scare away thieves.)

'"How recently did they put warnings on the packs?"'

"Seventies, was it? Just a guess..."

We only got them in the UK in the 90s. Around the same time that advertising ciggies on TV was banned.


------------------
"Why do you want to spend time with a deer? They're so stupid, they get hypnotized by headlights!" - Guido Anchovy


[This message has been edited by PsyLiam (edited October 16, 2000).]

[This message has been edited by PsyLiam (edited October 16, 2000).]
 


Posted by Omega (Member # 91) on :
 
"We only got them in the UK in the 90s."

Well, that's your gov'ment's fault. They certainly should have warnings.

And if you really want to scare away thieves, just get a gun, and advertize that you have one. Not many robbers would be so stupid as to break in then.

'Course, then you'd have to deal with the police...

------------------
"The power of accurate observation is commonly called cynicism by those who have not got it."
- George Bernard Shaw


 


Posted by Jay the Obscure (Member # 19) on :
 
quote:
Well, that's your gov'ment's fault. They certainly should have warnings.

But by your reasoning the government should have nothing to do with that sort of thing.

Incoherence - 1
Consistency - Nil

Thank you Omega for that lesson in conservative jive talk.

Liam:

I am very interested in that "Scare Omega" idea you have. Oh, that would be priceless. Maybe a life-sized resin figure of our favorite conservative would turn the trick. We could place them in places to scare bad people away...like subway stations or dark alleys.

------------------
This is a place of business, not a peewee flopphouse!
~C. Montgomery Burns
 


Posted by Omega (Member # 91) on :
 
Now when did I advocate there not being warnings on the things? Must have missed that, too...

And perhaps this would be a good time to plug my new collectible line: Omega Crystal Figurines! That's right, now YOU can own your very own replica of everyone's favorite conservative! Order now, and we'll throw in the talking Omega doll absolutely FREE! Only four easy payments of $49.95. Hurry, we only have a few left!

------------------
"The power of accurate observation is commonly called cynicism by those who have not got it."
- George Bernard Shaw


 


Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
 
My favorite conservative is George Will, actually. Very silly at times, but he writes well.

------------------
love's function is to fabricate unknownnness
--
E. E. Cummings
****
Read chapter one of "Dirk Tungsten in...The Disappearing Planet"! And party everyday.

 


Posted by Jay the Obscure (Member # 19) on :
 
Where does it say in the Constitution, my little strict reading of that great document friend, that the government has the power to require private industry to put lables on things?

This isn't an ingredient label even. That is more or less common sence. And yet you say it is proper for the government to force tobacco companies to have these lables.

Certainly not a voluntary thing to do. Thwarts business initiative and all that by scaring customers away telling them that your product will kill them...even though the tobacco CEO trooped up to Capitol Hill and contended up until a couple of years ago that smoking tobacco wern't all that bad.

I'm starting to think of a warning lable the government could put on most of Omega's arguments: Inconsistent.

------------------
Get going! And answer those phones, install the computer system, and rotate my office so the window faces the hills.
~C. Montgomery Burns

[This message has been edited by Jay (edited October 17, 2000).]
 


Posted by Omega (Member # 91) on :
 
No, you're assuming things. I said that it's BRITTAIN's government's fault that there weren't warnings. IINM, they have no constitution over there, as such, and thus it's perfectly legal to force labels. Here it's a different matter. It IS NOT constitutional for such a law to exist over here. If someone wants to put something in their body, then they should FIND OUT WHAT THE FREAKIN' STUFF DOES FIRST! If I say, "Ooh, this is labeled "cyanide". Don't know what that is, but I think I'll ingest some anyway," did I die due to the labeling company's neglegence, or due to my own stupidity?

------------------
"The power of accurate observation is commonly called cynicism by those who have not got it."
- George Bernard Shaw


 


Posted by Shik (Member # 343) on :
 
Shouldn't that be "Brattain?" Heh...

Sad as I am t'say it...I gotta go with Omega here. I really DON'T want the cattle to be warned. I WANT the idiots & morons to off themselves. For millennia, stupidity & ignorance have been a major cleansing force for the planet...no point in fiddling with nature, I say.

------------------
"Two parts slush...one part solid ice...one part hard-packed snow...a dash of assorted debris...sculpt into sphere, and serve at high velocity without warning." --Calvin
 


Posted by Omega (Member # 91) on :
 
I'd say spelling is my worst subject, but it'd be kinda obvious by now. Only 83rd percentile...

------------------
"The power of accurate observation is commonly called cynicism by those who have not got it."
- George Bernard Shaw


 


Posted by Jay the Obscure (Member # 19) on :
 
Oh, my bad, I missunderstood...when you say that they should have lables, you only mean in Britian. Gotcha.

------------------
Get going! And answer those phones, install the computer system, and rotate my office so the window faces the hills.
~C. Montgomery Burns

[This message has been edited by Jay (edited October 18, 2000).]
 


Posted by Omega (Member # 91) on :
 
Jay, are you really a moron, or do you just like trying to infuriate me? If so, you're failing.

Let me say this so clearly that even you can understand: ASSUMING that one wants to blame someone for not putting labels on cigarettes in Brittain until this decade, then one should blame the government. Since in England, the government ru(i)ns pretty well everything, why not that, too? Would it not seem inconsistant to expect it to pay for your medical bills, but then blame someone else when there aren't labels on poisonous products? If you want a government with that much power, then should you not also hold IT accountable for all those things over which it has power?

The people of Brittain relinquished their responsibility for finding the truth, instead giving it over to their government. Said government seems to have mishandled the responsibility.

------------------
Pilot: You're sure they were Americans, eh?
Fraser: They were all wearing new boots, they were driving a Jeep Wrangler, and they carried big guns.
Pilot: Americans it is.
- "due South"
 


Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
 
Britain.
Great Britain, if you'd like.
The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, if you'd even like-er.
The UK if you're in a hurry.
England, if you really want to piss off the Scots and/or Welsh.

------------------
love's function is to fabricate unknownnness
--
E. E. Cummings
****
Read chapter one of "Dirk Tungsten in...The Disappearing Planet"! And party everyday.

 


Posted by Jay the Obscure (Member # 19) on :
 
Well, we're not about blame here Omega...

we're just about lables on packs of tobacco. Or apparently just about anything else the PM finds objectionable. Which is ok in the UK because they don't have a written constitution and the government tells everyone when to take a pee.

Liam must have a pretty dern restricted life with all that. Labels on his pants declaring a beasty resides within...lables on pints cause it's bad to drink and drive...lables on taxi cabs declaring they could run you over...lables on crosswalks declaring that cabs could run you over while in them....

Oh, and Liam, don't you dare seek truth...that's left in the hands of the PM.

Say, didn't the government of the UK ask Dunhill to take the royal crest of their packaging.

------------------
Get going! And answer those phones, install the computer system, and rotate my office so the window faces the hills.
~C. Montgomery Burns

[This message has been edited by Jay (edited October 18, 2000).]
 


Posted by Omega (Member # 91) on :
 
"lables on crosswalks declaring that cabs could run you over while in them..."

Now THAT's not a bad idea.

The point is that they COULD do all those things, could they not?

------------------
Pilot: You're sure they were Americans, eh?
Fraser: They were all wearing new boots, they were driving a Jeep Wrangler, and they carried big guns.
Pilot: Americans it is.
- "due South"
 


Posted by Vacuum robot lady from Spaceballs (Member # 239) on :
 
But they aren't. You must have ulcers or something, because you're always thinking about far off situations and what might happen. I bet you don't go outside much, do you?

"The sun might fall down on me, and kill me and my guns!"
"No, it won't."
"But there's no law in the Constitution that says the Government CAN'T use the sun as a gigantic weapon to kill us all!"

------------------
"...Well, we're about to witness All-in Wrestling, brought to you tonight, ladies and gentlemen, by the makers of Scum�, the world's first combined hair oil, foot ointment, and salad dressing; and by the makers of Titan�, the novelty nuclear missile. You never know when it'll go off!" - Monty Python, Live at the Hollywood Bowl.
*ahem*


 


Posted by First of Two (Member # 16) on :
 
You don't like to speculate on things that could happen, might happen, or could have happened?
Then WHAT THE HELL are you doing, liking Sci-Fi???

Now, I admit, it may be taking a pessimistic view to be worrying about the possibility of some mega-powerful government running roughshod over people's rights...

Then again, it could just be learning from history.
After all, it's not as though the concept is something NEW..

France, Germany, Spain, England -- The Medieval Inquisitions and Witchhunts.
Nazi Germany.
Soviet Europe.
Any number of currectly active or formerly active dictatorships.
South Africa under Apartheid.

I think Q had something in "Farpoint" when he said: "Knowing Humans as you do, would YOU be caught helpless by them?"

Government is just a mess of humans. Emphasis on mess. Giving government ANY more power than what it absolutely NEEDS to survive is ALWAYS a dangerous proposition. The US Constitution Writers TRIED to forestall such things happening when they included the Bill of Rights in the Supreme Law of the Land. Unfortunately, various interpretations and legal wrangling have somewhat reduced and diluted the prominence and preeminince of that document.

Government is to protect you from threats more powerful than yourself, (while still maintaining inviolate your inherent rights) and to see to it that you have the opportunity to advance yourself according to your ability and ambition.

It is NOT its job to see to it that you succeed no matter what, or to enforce equity. Equity is an illusion.

It is governments job to se that we are all equal under the LAW, not in reality. Reality is something we have to change by ourselves and in ourselves.

Someone pointed out affirmative action.
Affirmative action has not served to end racism, bias, or economic inequity. Rather, it has served to create a restrictive system of quotas under which accomplishment takes a back seat to ethnic origin.. the exact OPPOSITE of MLK Jr.'s "Dream" in which we are judged by the content of our character.

Affirmative action and programs like it are methods of attempting to change behaviour through force. Historically and psychologically, this is an innefective tactic. For lasting harmonious results, reason beats force hands down.

Be the best person for the job, and get hired.
Learn, and achieve.
If you are denied a position because you are of a different race, DESPITE being the person most qualified, THEN you have occasion to sue. But if you simply are less qualified, and still think the job should be given to you because your ancestors were oppressed... screw you. Grow up.

------------------
"Ed Gruberman, you fail to grasp Ty Kwan Leap. Approach me, that you might see." -- The Master



 


Posted by Vacuum robot lady from Spaceballs (Member # 239) on :
 
Because, we all know, since the dawn of the first government structure way back when Ugh and Ogh were the only two names widely used, they ONLY used their power to take control over people's lives and ruin their personal freedoms. The only true way to make sure that the good old Bib-Constitution is ABSOLUTELY OBEYED to the letter is if we get Anarchy in here. That way Big, old oppressive government, Brother won't strip us of our civil and human rights. That, or get some southern state to populate the government.

Is it really that fucking bad for you? Are you so downtrodden and ridden into societal dirt that you need to brace yourself for whatever the omnipotent government will do to you? If you spent half the time you did bitching about how the government is this or that, and actually did some fucking good for your country, I'm sure it'd be a fucking preverbial u-fucking-topia.

------------------
"...Well, we're about to witness All-in Wrestling, brought to you tonight, ladies and gentlemen, by the makers of Scum�, the world's first combined hair oil, foot ointment, and salad dressing; and by the makers of Titan�, the novelty nuclear missile. You never know when it'll go off!" - Monty Python, Live at the Hollywood Bowl.
*ahem*


 


Posted by Omega (Member # 91) on :
 
"But there's no law in the Constitution that says the Government CAN'T use the sun as a gigantic weapon to kill us all!"

Sure there is. Read the tenth ammendment. You know, the one that is always ignored, thus leading to our suspicion in the first place?

------------------
Pilot: You're sure they were Americans, eh?
Fraser: They were all wearing new boots, they were driving a Jeep Wrangler, and they carried big guns.
Pilot: Americans it is.
- "due South"
 


Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
 
There's an ammendment to prevent the sun being used for mass murder?

Wow, your founding fathers really did think of everything. But doesn't that make the hole in the ozone layer unconstitutional?

------------------
"Why do you want to spend time with a deer? They're so stupid, they get hypnotized by headlights!" - Guido Anchovy



 


Posted by Shik (Member # 343) on :
 
OK, so by Omega's logic...I can petition Governor Rowland to exercise Connecticut's right to not have to be bothered by rabid baseball fans in The City & have him tractor Sol down onto both Yankee AND Shea Stadiums??

Hot DAMN!!

------------------
"Two parts slush...one part solid ice...one part hard-packed snow...a dash of assorted debris...sculpt into sphere, and serve at high velocity without warning." --Calvin
 


Posted by Omega (Member # 91) on :
 
You two didn't follow instructions. Actually READ the tenth ammendment:

"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

This states, for anyone that actually cares about the supreme law of our country, that the government can't do ANYTHING that the constitution doesn't allow for. That would obviously include using the sun as a weapon o' mass destruction.

"Wow, your founding fathers really did think of everything."

They didn't have to. They KNEW that they couldn't. Thus the 9th/10th ammendments, since they really are complimentary to each other. The ninth states that just because the constitution doesn't say that I have a particular right doesn't mean that I don't have that right. So taken in entirity, the two ammendments state that the people can do pretty well whatever they want, so long as the constitution doesn't allow the government to forbid it (under Federal law, obviously, since state and local control is completely different). They also state that the government can do ONLY what is stated in the constitution.

Rights of people: Boundless, so long as they don't interfere with others.

Powers of government: Few. All enumerated in the constitution.

Simple enough for you?

"But doesn't that make the hole in the ozone layer unconstitutional?"

You mean that yearly cyclical thing that we have nothing to do with?

------------------
Pilot: You're sure they were Americans, eh?
Fraser: They were all wearing new boots, they were driving a Jeep Wrangler, and they carried big guns.
Pilot: Americans it is.
- "due South"
 


Posted by Vacuum robot lady from Spaceballs (Member # 239) on :
 
Nothing to see here.

[This message has been edited by Ultra Magnus (edited October 19, 2000).]
 


Posted by Shik (Member # 343) on :
 
No, that yearly cyclical thing that EVERYONE has t'do with.

Gee, from my fun & handy guide to the Constitution come this explanatory paragraph:

"This amendment was adopted to reassure people that the national government would not swallow up the states. It confirms that the states or the people retain all powers not given to the national government. for example, the states have authority over such matters as marriage and divorce. But the Constitution says the government can make any laws 'necessary and proper' to carry out its specific powers. This rule makes it hard to determine the exact rights of states."

Therefore, my sarcasm bomb DID indeed detonate withOUT your disarming it (next time, learn to check for traps) & handed you 4d8 hit points of damge & causing you to lose 3 ego points. Plus kudos & shout-outs to the Washington G-Dog Posse for reading about Omega's birth in the Book of Nostradamus & effectively circumventing him. Dilly UP, yo'....

------------------
"Two parts slush...one part solid ice...one part hard-packed snow...a dash of assorted debris...sculpt into sphere, and serve at high velocity without warning." --Calvin
 


Posted by Omega (Member # 91) on :
 
Well, your fun and handy guide is also wrong. It's not hard at all to determine the rights of states. There are exactly three reasons that a state can't do something. 1: The US constitution says it can't. 2: The state constitution says it can't. 3: The Federal government says the state can't, in reference to a power the federal government is granted jurisdiction over by the constitution. Other than that, the state can darned well do what it pleases.

Of COURSE the government can make any laws 'necessary and proper' to carry out its specific powers. Otherwise, what good are they? But those powers are specifically enumerated in the constitution, and there are none beyond them.

------------------
Pilot: You're sure they were Americans, eh?
Fraser: They were all wearing new boots, they were driving a Jeep Wrangler, and they carried big guns.
Pilot: Americans it is.
- "due South"
 


Posted by Shik (Member # 343) on :
 
Hmm... :::picks up dictionary:::

Circ...circ...circle...ah. CIRCULAR REASONING. "See REASONING, CIRCULAR." Hmm. OK.

:::flips through pages::: Reas...reas...reason...ah. REASONING, CIRCULAR. "See CIRCULAR REASONING."

Hmm. OK.

------------------
"Two parts slush...one part solid ice...one part hard-packed snow...a dash of assorted debris...sculpt into sphere, and serve at high velocity without warning." --Calvin
 


Posted by Jay the Obscure (Member # 19) on :
 
Well, Omega is still in the early stages of learing about Constitutional law.

------------------
Get going! And answer those phones, install the computer system, and rotate my office so the window faces the hills.
~C. Montgomery Burns
 


Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
 
I don't want to go to Yankee Stadium.

------------------
love's function is to fabricate unknownnness
--
E. E. Cummings
****
Read chapter one of "Dirk Tungsten in...The Disappearing Planet"! And party everyday.

 


Posted by Omega (Member # 91) on :
 
Exactly what are you guys blithering on about, now?

------------------
Pilot: You're sure they were Americans, eh?
Fraser: They were all wearing new boots, they were driving a Jeep Wrangler, and they carried big guns.
Pilot: Americans it is.
- "due South"
 


Posted by Vacuum robot lady from Spaceballs (Member # 239) on :
 
Omega gets trounced, acts confused and tries to insinuate that the offending party is incoherent.

Ah, nice strategy my friend, but after many a "diss", I do feel that "I'll punch your lights out" or a good, old "My Dad could beat up your Dad" are the two best choices for mindless rebuttal. Or you can lick them. They don't like that much.

------------------
"...Well, we're about to witness All-in Wrestling, brought to you tonight, ladies and gentlemen, by the makers of Scum�, the world's first combined hair oil, foot ointment, and salad dressing; and by the makers of Titan�, the novelty nuclear missile. You never know when it'll go off!" - Monty Python, Live at the Hollywood Bowl.
 


Posted by Saltah'na (Member # 33) on :
 
Boy, I really don't have time to make really large responses these days.......

"Not when there are warnings on the packs, you can't. People who start smoking have every opportunity to know what they're getting into. If I know that a substance is dangerous, and use it anyway, it's my own darned fault."

Point. But there ARE other companies who should be charged with criminal negligence and shut down, like say the company that is dumping pollution into the river, killing a person who lives downstream.

Speaking of Tobacco lawsuits, I somehow find it amusing that smokers are suing the tobacco companies for millions of dollars for whatever cockamamy reason they can think of. Not that I'm against these lawsuits, I just find them mildly amusing. Yes, Omega, I'm tempted to say "Well you got yourself in this mess. Go sue yourself".

"I didn't say that. I said they CAN. The government is the only entity that has the power to actually force you to do anything. I'm not willing to simply trust them not to excercize it."

Then what do you trust them to do then? Somehow, I feel you're an ultra-paranoid person afraid that the Government is going to kidnap and perform gruesome and disgusting experiments on you simply because they could draft a law that says so.

Not going to happen. Relax. Lighten up. Sooner or later, there will be an instance that you will thank the government for reasons OTHER than lowering taxes.

Speaking of power, when a group of people (namely business leaders) have a firm hold of the government's ear and spits out policies that only benefit them and no one else, and the government listens over the overwhelming opposition from everyone else, who has the power? It's all about influence. And Influence IS power these days.

"No one down here is suggesting this that I've heard."

Be sure to keep it that way. But keep in mind that there are many people who think that Ontario's politicians got their ideas from several US states. I've heard that New Jersey was one of them.

"Funny thing, then, that these are the same people who support school vouchers, which give the poor access to the first-rate education..."

I meant two-tiered education, as in the rich pay for first rate education, while those who can't afford it get sent to second-rate schools poorly funded by the government due to cutbacks and people saying "now that there aren't many people going to the public schools, we can cut public education". But they would make more cuts than they need to, and they would call them "justified".

Admittedly, I've heard about vouchers, but I don't quite know what they're about. People around here say they are bad, for some reason that I can't figure out. Could you educate us, o kind Omega?

"Companies don't lay off workers just to give higher-ups a bonus. That'd be stupid, and business owners aren't stupid (at least, not the successful ones). If they lay off workers, they have a reason. Namely, that they're not needed any more for whatever reason, or that they're not doing their job as well as needed. I SERIOUSLY doubt that you could find an instance where some poor sap is fired, specifically to give the boss a bonus."

Though information is outdated, I did hear that at one point, at the Royal Bank of Canada, they had a successful year. Yet they laid off hundreds of workers, mainly tellers, closed several branches, and the CEO by the name of John Cleghorn was given a bonus. If the branches were not needed, then the employees could have been reassigned to different and expanding areas of the business. Rather, the company gave them the pink slip instead.

Also I believe workers at the Calgary Herald went on strike when they discovered that higher-ups were getting a bonus of up to 25%, while the Herald offered a contract to its unionized workers that included a pay CUT and LAYOFFS. Something's not right here. Again, this is what I've heard, correct me if I'm wrong. And oh, BTW, the Calgary Herald is owned by Conrad Black, a newspaper mogul who furthers his ultra-conservative political views by the many newspapers he owns.

"If I say, "Ooh, this is labeled "cyanide". Don't know what that is, but I think I'll ingest some anyway," did I die due to the labeling company's neglegence, or due to my own stupidity?

You really think everyone oughta look up every substance before using it? Besides, someone might think cyanide is a candy, not a chemical. Not everyone is smart as you, Omega.

Okay fine. Broken record time. Sue me.

"If you want a government with that much power, then should you not also hold IT accountable for all those things over which it has power?"

*CLAPS* Right on. That's what government is supposed to be about anyways. Though admittedly, accountability is nowhere in Canada's political spectrum, left, right, AND centre.

As for First's comments. I agree with the majority of them. Especially the bit on Affirmative Action. It should be Affirmative Action through Education, not Force.

------------------
"My Name is Elmer Fudd, Millionaire. I own a Mansion and a Yacht."
Psychiatrist: "Again."

 


Posted by Omega (Member # 91) on :
 
"the company that is dumping pollution into the river, killing a person who lives downstream."

Of course. But that's why we have laws against that. The owner of the factory on the bank doesn't own the river, too, so he obviously can't pollute it.

"Then what do you trust [the government] to do then?"

Well, that's kind of an odd question. I simply don't entrust ANYONE with the power to take away my freedom.

And I'll say it one more time: there is a difference between paranoia and legitimate fear. Does the government have the power THEORETICALLY to take away my freedom? The answer is obviously yes, so thus I do not trust them.

"...when a group of people (namely business leaders) have a firm hold of the government's ear and spits out policies that only benefit them and no one else, and the government listens over the overwhelming opposition from everyone else..."

And you call me paranoid?

j/k, that's something to watch out for, too. But that's why we can vote corrupt leaders out of office.

"...second-rate schools poorly funded by the government due to cutbacks..."

*ahem*

WHAT CUTBACKS!? There have been NO cuts on the federal level in the ENTIRE Clinton administration, except in the military! The private schools I went to for my elementary years didn't cost HALF as much as the funding that most public schools get, and they did a FAR better job, too. The schools aren't second-rate due to funding. It's due to how they're run.

"...they would make more cuts than they need to, and they would call them "justified"."

Again, you're calling ME paranoid?

"Could you educate us, o kind Omega?"

With pleasure, grasshopper. You see, when a school is failing to teach its students, the parents of the children frequently have no recourse. They can't afford private schooling, and they can't send their kids to a different district. (Why they don't consider homeschooling, I really don't know. Perhaps the children aren't diciplined enough to do it on their own?) A voucher helps them do either, depending on their preferences. It gives the parents a choice regarding the education of their child, and I ask you, how can that be a bad thing?

As for your examples, I stand corrected. Sometimes successful business owners ARE stupid.

"You really think everyone oughta look up every substance before using it?"

Yes. Barring that, I'd get a legaly binding guarentee that the product is NOT harmful. 'Course, then you'd have to deal with the fact that it might kill you instantly, depriving you of the chance to sue, and you'd also have to proove that it was, in fact, that particular product that harmed you. So it'd probably be safer and simpler to actually learn about the things you consume.

"Besides, someone might think cyanide is a candy, not a chemical."

Which is why they should look it up.

"Not everyone is smart as you, Omega."

Well, that goes without saying.

"Boy, I really don't have time to make really large responses these days..."

Too bad. They're pretty well thought out.

UM:

Let's see. Shik and co. think they've made a point, which no one else seems to understand, and think they've trounced me. Nice strategy, but hardly credible.

------------------
Pilot: You're sure they were Americans, eh?
Fraser: They were all wearing new boots, they were driving a Jeep Wrangler, and they carried big guns.
Pilot: Americans it is.
- "due South"
 


Posted by Vacuum robot lady from Spaceballs (Member # 239) on :
 
Still, they do have lights you could punch out, no?

------------------
"...Well, we're about to witness All-in Wrestling, brought to you tonight, ladies and gentlemen, by the makers of Scum�, the world's first combined hair oil, foot ointment, and salad dressing; and by the makers of Titan�, the novelty nuclear missile. You never know when it'll go off!" - Monty Python, Live at the Hollywood Bowl.
 


Posted by Shik (Member # 343) on :
 
I don't think I've trounced you...I just think you're a blindered putz & I know there's no way short of the Universe itself taking physical form & saying, "Hi, Omega...sorry, but you're wrong" to convince you.

Of course, since the Universe itself has the power to take away your personal freedoms, I doubt you'd trust it or believe in anything it had to say. In fact, I'm SURE you don't listen to it currently. I bet you'd shoot it, too.

------------------
"Two parts slush...one part solid ice...one part hard-packed snow...a dash of assorted debris...sculpt into sphere, and serve at high velocity without warning." --Calvin
 


Posted by Omega (Member # 91) on :
 
Someone WILL tell me if he comes up with anything rational to say, right?

------------------
Pilot: You're sure they were Americans, eh?
Fraser: They were all wearing new boots, they were driving a Jeep Wrangler, and they carried big guns.
Pilot: Americans it is.
- "due South"
 


Posted by Malnurtured Snay (Member # 411) on :
 
Of course, Omega!

In fact, its the same person who is going to tell me when YOU say something that makes the tiniest bit of sense.

=)

------------------
Jeff's Webcam
***
Gore/Lieberman 2000
***
"Mac asked me to look after her [Jennifer Hill] while he's in San Francisco whacking the son of a bitch who killed her husband." - Richie Ryan

"Richie ... *you're* the son of a bitch who whacked her husband!" -- Joe Dawson

"Haunted" - Highlander: The Series


 


Posted by The_Tom (Member # 38) on :
 
Two points following Tahna's post that have little real relevance:

1)The Calagary Herald isn't owned by Black anymore. Izzy swiped it a few months ago.

2)Cyanide bottles will carry, by law, international warning symbols on it. And yet, strangely enough, Cigarettes can't even be regulated by the Food and Drug administration?

------------------
"...I was just up in Canada, Toronto actually. You know, they really hate you guys [Americans] up there? The funny thing is, they think you hate them back, when in fact, you just couldn't be bothered to care. Now in Ireland, it's a different story. At least we had the common decency to wait until the English invaded before we started hating them. I guess the Canadians are hating you in advance..."
-Irish Comic Ed Byrne on Canada-US relations



 


Posted by Jay the Obscure (Member # 19) on :
 
quote:
Companies don't lay off workers just to give higher-ups a bonus. That'd be stupid, and business owners aren't stupid (at least, not the successful ones). If they lay off workers, they have a reason.

I must have missed that somewhere in a Sprite induced haze....

Well, color me pink and call me Brenda. I don't think it's quite right just to call the myriad of CEO's, CTO's, CKO's, CFO's, vice president of this and of that silmpy higher ups. And yes, when all these members of the good old person alphabet soup club move on to another good old person alphabet soup club job...they take their huge bonuses.

Oh, my who gets to pay for that? Can you say the workers? Case in point. Times Mirror gets bought out by the Tribune. Mark Wiles leaves the company after messing it up royally...er, running it for a couple of years with a package worth 65 million. Oh, my...how is the Tribune going to pay for that? Certainly not out of the money they pay good old person alphabet soup club. If you said yes, you'd be wrongo there Sport. Since then there have been cancelation of projects, workers who leave aren't replaced, and yes Sally, layoffs.

By your own trickle down theory Omega, taken to the level of big business, the good old person alphabet soup club members need to be greased at the expence of the workers so that their mighty ideas will continue to flow over 2 martini lunches.

quote:
As for your examples, I stand corrected. Sometimes successful business owners ARE stupid.

Having given the ground, I didn't really want to rehash all of it, but it struck me that since you haven't had the opportunity to work in the business environment, your very pro business stance can be very wrong.

------------------
Get going! And answer those phones, install the computer system, and rotate my office so the window faces the hills.
~C. Montgomery Burns
 


Posted by Jay the Obscure (Member # 19) on :
 
quote:
Of course. But that's why we have laws against that. The owner of the factory on the bank doesn't own the river, too, so he obviously can't pollute it.

Ok, si maybe it's the phrasing I'm having trouble with when it comes to the above quote.

Laws against pollution are good...local, state and federal. I hold with those who say that such laws need enforcment rather than augmentation...that is until someone finds a loophole and can beat the letter if not the spirit of any given law.

Anyway, it's the last part that I'm not sure about. The part that says that company A doesn't own river B and therefor can not pollute the river.

How does that work? If I don't own something, I can throw all the junk I want to in it or on it and it's not polluting? Whoo hooo....trash out the window here I come!!!

Sorry Ironeyes.

------------------
Get going! And answer those phones, install the computer system, and rotate my office so the window faces the hills.
~C. Montgomery Burns
 


Posted by First of Two (Member # 16) on :
 
It's impossible to "own" a river, since a river is a mobile entity in a constant state of flux, that has effects far beyond its bounds. Same as the sky, no matter how much blathering you hear from nations about 'airspace.'

If you are not permitted to pollute that which you do not own, than certainly you cannot pollute the water or the air. And since things put into the ground will, in most cases, eventually affect the ground water, another travelling entity, you can't pollute that, either.

That's pretty simple.

Another fairly simple thing to see is thatr if we enforced existing regulations, rather than ignoring them, plea-bargaining them down, or deliberately creating loopholes and exceptions for our friends (like Slick Willie and Ozone Al have in several cases) it is unlikely that we would need further rules and regulations to pick up the slack.

But try to explain that to someone with regulation-mania... it's like talking to a TOS ambassador.

------------------
"Ed Gruberman, you fail to grasp Ty Kwan Leap. Approach me, that you might see." -- The Master



 


Posted by Vacuum robot lady from Spaceballs (Member # 239) on :
 
quote:
It's impossible to "own" a river, since a river is a mobile entity in a constant state of flux

Well, then what about this 'Dawson' fellow? It seems to me he owns a creek...
 


Posted by Jay the Obscure (Member # 19) on :
 
Again, I am still stuck on the phrasing.

"so he obviously can't pollute it."

As you point out it could mean that he is prohibited by law from polluting? One that I did not gleen from the statment and thanks for pointing it out.

Rather what I took was that the owner of the business, simply by the fact of non ownership of the river, does not have the ability to pollute said river.

At any rate, rivers do get polluted, so the "can't" really doesn't work there because they "can", it's just against the law.

------------------
Get going! And answer those phones, install the computer system, and rotate my office so the window faces the hills.
~C. Montgomery Burns
 


Posted by Omega (Member # 91) on :
 
Well, when someone says can't, when they obviously can, it's usually taken to mean "can, but really aren't supposed to." At least, by those of us interested in legitimate exchange of information.

------------------
Pilot: You're sure they were Americans, eh?
Fraser: They were all wearing new boots, they were driving a Jeep Wrangler, and they carried big guns.
Pilot: Americans it is.
- "due South"
 


Posted by Saltah'na (Member # 33) on :
 
"With pleasure, grasshopper."

Omega, two words... FUCK OFF!!! That was a mean and unjustified attack. And you know the HELL what I'm talking about.

I do my best to support myself in the way I can in the face of overwhelming opposition from dictator-from-hell-mother. Whenever I have my problems, I deal with my problems on my own, and I do not expect anyone else to help me. In effect, I'm trying to strike out on my own. I'm here to offer comments from MY side of the political spectrum. The LAST THING I need from you is a fucking disparaging comment like this.

I really don't feel like commenting on your responses. I've had a bad day. And you've just made it worse.

BTW: Liberals are NOT grasshoppers.

------------------
"My Name is Elmer Fudd, Millionaire. I own a Mansion and a Yacht."
Psychiatrist: "Again."

[This message has been edited by Tahna Los (edited October 22, 2000).]
 


Posted by Vacuum robot lady from Spaceballs (Member # 239) on :
 
AAAAAccckkkkk.

Even I got that Omega was sarcastic with that remark.

Someone said "Oh, educate us, Omega" or something to that effect.

And, Omega, to the best of my deduction, replied facetiously [sp], "ok, grasshopper". In reference to him being (sarcastedly) the leader and.or mentor. [See First's signature for an example in Modern Day speech.]

I don't think that warrented a FUCK OFF in any respect of those two great words together. Nor do I think it was any reference to Liberals.

Although, I cannot fathom how calling Liberals grasshoppers is an attack.

"You're NDP? You millipede!"

"YOU BASTARD!!!! NDP'ers ARE NOT Millipedes!!! That was below the belt. Or belts, as it were. We do have 100's of legs you know."

------------------
"Hockey is a sport for white men. Basketball is a sport for black men. Golf is a sport for white men dressed like black pimps."
- Tiger Woods

[This message has been edited by Ultra Magnus (edited October 22, 2000).]
 


Posted by Omega (Member # 91) on :
 
Thank you, UM. Some people can be overly sensitive.

Sorry I offended you, Tahna. You really must watch more of those old Japanese movies.

------------------
Pilot: You're sure they were Americans, eh?
Fraser: They were all wearing new boots, they were driving a Jeep Wrangler, and they carried big guns.
Pilot: Americans it is.
- "due South"
 


Posted by Saltah'na (Member # 33) on :
 
I say "Oh, educate us, Omega" because first of all, I don't know what voucher schools are. I have NO IDEA how they work. No sarcasm there. Just a simple request to get the facts from HIS side of the table.

And Omega, you didn't think I read THIS? didn't you? Are you saying that I'm a lazy ass bum who does no work but live off the teat of others don't you? You think ALL liberals are like that, are you?

If there is ONE thing that I hate about your remark, it is that you are being entirely STEREOTYPICAL to me, as well as everyone who isn't in the same social footing as you, i.e. the liberals and less fortunate. That's right, the poor WANT to do nothing but live off goverment assistance. Girls DELIBERATELY get themselves pregnant so they can get a fat cheque. People DELIBERATELY go off work because they say "hey, I can get a good sum of money for doing NOTHING".

Is that what you believe, Omega? Is THAT what you think I am?

THAT'S why I'm really pissed. And I still am. That pansy comment about Japanese movies doesn't make your apology acceptable.

[This message has been edited by Tahna Los (edited October 22, 2000).]
 


Posted by Omega (Member # 91) on :
 
I didn't apologize. I'm not sorry I said it, just that it offended you unnesecarily. But you don't seem interested in figuring out what I actually meant, so what's the point?

But for those of you who actually care about facts, I wasn't refering to that story. I was refering to, as I said, old Japanese movies. You know, the ones where the student interrupts his 150 year old master, who then rebukes him, saying, "Patience, grasshopper," or a similar scene. The whole "Teach us, oh wise Omega" thing simply reminded me of the scene.

------------------
Pilot: You're sure they were Americans, eh?
Fraser: They were all wearing new boots, they were driving a Jeep Wrangler, and they carried big guns.
Pilot: Americans it is.
- "due South"
 


Posted by Saltah'na (Member # 33) on :
 
Fine. I'll apologize for getting upset at you. But next time choose your words carefully. But you do understand my beef about the ant and grasshopper, do you?

I will deliver responses to your other remarks later in the day.

------------------
"My Name is Elmer Fudd, Millionaire. I own a Mansion and a Yacht."
Psychiatrist: "Again."

 


Posted by Omega (Member # 91) on :
 
Oh, sure, I get it. Again, sorry it offended you.

------------------
Pilot: You're sure they were Americans, eh?
Fraser: They were all wearing new boots, they were driving a Jeep Wrangler, and they carried big guns.
Pilot: Americans it is.
- "due South"
 


Posted by Vacuum robot lady from Spaceballs (Member # 239) on :
 
You really shouldn't be sorry. You didn't do anything wrong. Tahna became all wierded out because he thought you were calling him "a lazy-ass bum, who doesn't like the ant."

Well, obviously you weren't and he overreacted. It's not your fault he's overly sensitive.

It's quite unfortunate that the Internet doesn't have the ability to portray emotions or sarcasm, it'd help in situations like these.

If someone wants to be irrational, let them. Don't make apologies for something you didn't do.

------------------
"Hockey is a sport for white men. Basketball is a sport for black men. Golf is a sport for white men dressed like black pimps."
- Tiger Woods

 


Posted by Omega (Member # 91) on :
 
Well, I'm sorry it offended him, in that I wish it hadn't. I'm not apologizing for actually saying it.

------------------
Pilot: You're sure they were Americans, eh?
Fraser: They were all wearing new boots, they were driving a Jeep Wrangler, and they carried big guns.
Pilot: Americans it is.
- "due South"
 


Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
 
Okay, what the hell was that about? As far as I can tell, "Educate, oh Omega" sounds sarcastic. If you wanted to ask him a question without sarcasm, you could have said something like "Could you explain that please?".

And maybe I'm being really, really dense, but I don't get this argument. How is calling someone a grasshopper an insult of such magnitude that it merits a "FUCK OFF!"? I mean, if he'd said, "no problem ,you small-penised goat humping dwarf", or something, then, yeah, shout back at him. But "grasshopper"? Not something I see wars starting over.

------------------
"Why do you want to spend time with a deer? They're so stupid, they get hypnotized by headlights!" - Guido Anchovy


 


Posted by Vacuum robot lady from Spaceballs (Member # 239) on :
 
Apparently, in America, Grasshopper means a small-penised goat humping dwarf.

That's what you guys get with all your PCP's in the atmosphere. You were warned about horrible mutations...you were warned...

------------------
"Hockey is a sport for white men. Basketball is a sport for black men. Golf is a sport for white men dressed like black pimps."
- Tiger Woods

 


Posted by Aethelwer (Member # 36) on :
 
I think that's CFCs in the atmosphere. PCP would be far more interesting, I suppose.

------------------
Frank's Home Page
"Gardening for Dummies is too intense." - Rick
 


Posted by Shik (Member # 343) on :
 
Uh...that's PCBs, my fine cerulean robotic friend...

------------------
"Two parts slush...one part solid ice...one part hard-packed snow...a dash of assorted debris...sculpt into sphere, and serve at high velocity without warning." --Calvin
 


Posted by Vacuum robot lady from Spaceballs (Member # 239) on :
 
I meant what I meant...

------------------
"Hockey is a sport for white men. Basketball is a sport for black men. Golf is a sport for white men dressed like black pimps."
- Tiger Woods

 


Posted by Omega (Member # 91) on :
 
One usually does...

------------------
Pilot: You're sure they were Americans, eh?
Fraser: They were all wearing new boots, they were driving a Jeep Wrangler, and they carried big guns.
Pilot: Americans it is.
- "due South"
 


Posted by Jay the Obscure (Member # 19) on :
 
Did no one here ever watch "Kung Fu" for goodness sakes?

------------------
Get going! And answer those phones, install the computer system, and rotate my office so the window faces the hills.
~C. Montgomery Burns
 


Posted by Omega (Member # 91) on :
 
Ah, THAT'S the movie I was thinking of!

------------------
Pilot: You're sure they were Americans, eh?
Fraser: They were all wearing new boots, they were driving a Jeep Wrangler, and they carried big guns.
Pilot: Americans it is.
- "due South"
 


Posted by Saltah'na (Member # 33) on :
 
UM: No, I'm not overly sensitive. I just had a horrible day. :P

Liam: Read this. That's why I got upset.

For some reason, Liberals, don't like the idea of a "voucher system" for schools. I don't know exactly why. Thus, there was an implication that compared Liberals to the so-called "grasshopper" in the above link, an implication that I REALLY didn't like.

------------------
"My Name is Elmer Fudd, Millionaire. I own a Mansion and a Yacht."
Psychiatrist: "Again."

[This message has been edited by Tahna Los (edited October 23, 2000).]
 


Posted by First of Two (Member # 16) on :
 
Not an ant...
Not a grasshopper...

...a cockroach.

------------------
"Ed Gruberman, you fail to grasp Ty Kwan Leap. Approach me, that you might see." -- The Master



 


Posted by Saltah'na (Member # 33) on :
 
*smacks, kicks, bulldozes, stabs, fries, tars, crushes, suplexes, and drop kicks First*

------------------
"My Name is Elmer Fudd, Millionaire. I own a Mansion and a Yacht."
Psychiatrist: "Again."

 


Posted by First of Two (Member # 16) on :
 
Not you, silly. ME.

Cockroaches (as a species, anyway) can survive ANYTHING.

------------------
"Ed Gruberman, you fail to grasp Ty Kwan Leap. Approach me, that you might see." -- The Master



 


Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
 
They don't tend to get laid very often though.

------------------
"If every vampire who said he was at the Crucifixion was actually there it would've been like Woodstock. I was at Woodstock. I fed off a flower person and I spent six hours watching my hand move." - Spike, BtVS
 


Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
 
They couldn't survive a supernova. They couldn't survive going to the club and using the toilet, only to walk back onto the dance floor with an entire roll of paper stuck to the bottom of their platform shoes. The other insects would say nothing at first, allowing the poor cockroach raver to gyrate around the floor like nothing was wrong. But then he would trip over the paper and the club would erupt into great shouts of laughter. He would never be able to show his face there again. And you know what? Alyssa Robinson, the hottest cockroach on the whole drill team and the object of your secret crush for three semesters was there!

No cockroach could survive that.

------------------
love's function is to fabricate unknownnness
--
E. E. Cummings
****
Read chapter one of "Dirk Tungsten in...The Disappearing Planet"! And party everyday.

 


Posted by First of Two (Member # 16) on :
 
Well, in that case, I'm even hardier than a cockroach.

Psst! According to my encyclopedia, Liam, cockroaches mate every 25 days or so. That's not too bad, but it's still a little less often than me on average right now.

------------------
"Ed Gruberman, you fail to grasp Ty Kwan Leap. Approach me, that you might see." -- The Master



 


Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
 
Maybe so, but I can't imagine it's very satisying sleeping with a cockroach.

So, who's worse off? Poor Sol failing to get off with Alyssa? Or me, for not having sex every 25 days. I think, with all honesty, I deserve the pity.

(Although if Sol was wearing platform shoes, he deserved it, frankly. Unless "Night fever" came on, in which case, he should have been a shoo in.)

------------------
"If every vampire who said he was at the Crucifixion was actually there it would've been like Woodstock. I was at Woodstock. I fed off a flower person and I spent six hours watching my hand move." - Spike, BtVS
 


Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
 
I must report that that anecdote was not at all related to the love roller coaster that is my life. For instance, I have never been in a club, much less one populated by oversized anthropomorphic cockroaches. I went to a school dance when I was in eighth grade once, and I blew a chance to dance with a hot German girl several years later. That's about it.

Though I did see the object of my unhealthy fascination at the party featuring the German, and she was wearing a tiny bikini. The fascinating object (Or in this case, objects), that is, not the German. Who is now happily back in Germany, writing flowery letters to a friend of mine and asking about me. Though sadly, most of the flower is directed towards the friend.

But I'm not bitter.

------------------
love's function is to fabricate unknownnness
--
E. E. Cummings
****
Read chapter one of "Dirk Tungsten in...The Disappearing Planet"! And party everyday.

 


Posted by Lee (Member # 393) on :
 
Actually, Psy's sig just got me thinking: before the Crucifixion, the crucufix wasn't a holy symbol, right? So I wonder how that worked? Did it all of a sudden turn holy, so all the vampires were like, "yow, fuck!" or did they spend a century or two being afraid of fishes?

------------------
"So put your hands down my pants and I'll bet you'll feel nuts"

- Bloodhound Gang
 


Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
 
For that matter, why are Jewish vampires afraid of crosses (cf Willow in "Dopplegangerlan")? Shouldn't they be afriad of, er, burning bushes or something?

------------------
"If every vampire who said he was at the Crucifixion was actually there it would've been like Woodstock. I was at Woodstock. I fed off a flower person and I spent six hours watching my hand move." - Spike, BtVS
 


Posted by Shik (Member # 343) on :
 
Do you know how hard it is t'make the Star of David with your fingers??

------------------
"Two parts slush...one part solid ice...one part hard-packed snow...a dash of assorted debris...sculpt into sphere, and serve at high velocity without warning." --Calvin

 


Posted by First of Two (Member # 16) on :
 
Well, if we go vy the Vampire: The Masquerade RPG understanding, then holy symbols are only effective against vampires if the person holding them has true faith in their power, regardless of the symbol or the faith, or the faith of the vampire.

Interestingly enough, this means that a true diehard trekkie could conceivably hold off a vampire with the Enterprise Arrowhead symbol.

I don't know WHAT an Atheist or Agnostic could use, though. A copy of "Origin of Species?" A plastic model of the human brain?

------------------
"Ed Gruberman, you fail to grasp Ty Kwan Leap. Approach me, that you might see." -- The Master



 


Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
 
Well, an atheist, having rejected religion, should probably reject superstition as well, and the vampire would be forced back by the atheist's disbelief in its existance.

------------------
love's function is to fabricate unknownnness
--
E. E. Cummings
****
Read chapter one of "Dirk Tungsten in...The Disappearing Planet"! And party everyday.

 


Posted by Malnurtured Snay (Member # 411) on :
 
I was going to suggest a Darwin fish.

------------------
Read My Lips: NO NEW TEXANS!
***
Gore/Lieberman 2000
***
"I think anybody who doesn't think I'm smart enough to handle the job is underestimating." - George "Dubya" Bush


 


Posted by Vacuum robot lady from Spaceballs (Member # 239) on :
 
Are bats scared of fish though? They bite the hands that feed them as it were.

You know, 'cause 'fish', is on, like a woman, and like Vampires, you know bite them.

FU-Q H4X0RZ RvL3z1

------------------
Equality, Cooperation & Benevolence.

Vote Communist Party of America 2000.
 




© 1999-2024 Charles Capps

Powered by UBB.classic™ 6.7.3