Posted on 12/17/2005 8:22:07 AM PST by new yorker 77
How many homeless people do you feed and house in your underground dwelling? How many Katrina victims did you invite to stay?
I'm sure Stoessel's criticisms of government are as true as his criticisms of business. His specific criticisms of certain individuals and practices.
But his general criticisms? Why should I believe that specific failures of government can be generalized any more than specific failures of business? People make mistakes - in business, in government, in life. If government is always or mostly wrong and laissez-faire is mostly better then why not disband government entirely - no army, no police, no courts, no law? The flaws of such a policy are self-evident...so it should be clear that what we are looking for is balance and that is ever-changing and found only by trial and error.
You are more of an expert than you think. The only known factor suggesting a Dow goose on Monday is the favorable decision for Pfizer on the Lipitor patent. But as you suggest, no one waited around until Monday to bid the stock up. It popped 11% after hours on Friday.
Qualification to the above: Consensus in itself doesn't change stock prices. Only "urgency of bid" does (i.e. money at the right time and place). This is why sentiment as an indicator often fails. People can say one thing but fail to put money where their mouth is.
One small point Larry: The 'enviornment' is not the collective of living creatures, it is the solids liquids and gases on this planet.
If "influencing the enviornment" was cause for concern or change, then every single living thing on this planet is cause for concern.
Humans do not effect the enviornment, they exist in it like every other creature.
At one point in the earths history, that oil existed above ground first as its constituent elements, then as compounds(solid,liquid,gas), and then as part of the biomass. How is it possible that returning that oil to the enviornment is detrimental when in fact, it is the enviornment? It is that oil that was once biomass; a biomass that came from it?
I don't understand the logic of the global warming people. Do they want us to leave that oil in the ground? If we stopped using oil tommorrow, eventually all of the usefull life sustaining compounds would be consumed and be locked away as oil underground.
Matter can neither be created nor destroyed, it is finite.
The Democrats are threatened by a dynamic economy in that it, by definition, gnaws away at their primary asset; a large dependent class. Just as the Jesse Jackson type of civil right leader never wants to see actual improvements in race relations or a rising black middle class.
Not quite. Under our system there's a substantial middle class - called that for obvious reasons. And - supposedly - a rising tide lifts all boats. Isn't that what touts for our system are always saying?
I suppose you want to make it more difficult for the winners to succeed and less lucrative.
The last part is true.
There is one thing the liberals never quite explain in their wealth distribution world: Who gets to decide (power) which purse strings are pulled?
Your argument - carried to an extreme - is might is right. And that's true; he who wields the sword calls the shots. Who wields the sword? Different cultures and societies have different methods of deciding. The dominant one imposes its will on the others.
Capitalists want power to be in the hands of the people, and Socialists want power to be in the hands of government.
Not quite. Capitalists want power to be in the hands of capitalists, socialists want power to be in the hands of socialists, everyone wants power for themselves.
Now explain to my Larry why in your right mind would you give up control of your life to the government? and If your so hell bent on redistributing wealth, how much of your annual income do you give to your poor neighbors?
Even to put it that way is to answer the question in the negative. But put it another way and you get a different answer; I devote a fair amount of time to beneficial civic activities and our community recently voted to tax itself to support a community hospital.
definition: Communist 1)A liberal social progressive democrat in a hurry.
So TR was a communist? You need to do some serious rethinking.
Is that an oops?
At one point in the earths history, that oil existed above ground first as its constituent elements, then as compounds(solid,liquid,gas), and then as part of the biomass.
I know that is the prevailing theory of how oil and gas were created, combined with the heat and pressure underground, but what is the prevailing theory of how that stuff got from the surface to miles under ground?
It's both.
If "influencing the enviornment" was cause for concern or change, then every single living thing on this planet is cause for concern.
This is reductio ad absurdum. When one quantifies such arguments disappear.
At one point in the earths history, that oil existed above ground first as its constituent elements, then as compounds(solid,liquid,gas), and then as part of the biomass. How is it possible that returning that oil to the enviornment is detrimental when in fact, it is the enviornment? It is that oil that was once biomass; a biomass that came from it?
At one point there was no human life on earth. I prefer not to return to that condition.
I don't understand the logic of the global warming people.
Reducing the burning of hydrocarbons and limiting population size in some controllable and voluntary way seems preferable to alterning the climate in uncontrollable and unpredictable ways, destroying most other forms of life, and reducing human society to ashes in wars of scarcity.
11000, 13000, 15000 no limit. Corporate balance sheets looking great (not hiring americans, not building plants)We'll just keep printing $ til we get there. LOL
During bull markets, the ratio got as high as 45. During bear markets, it got as low as 1. Currently, the ratio is about 20.
Especially with helicopter commander Bernanke coming on board next March.
Why stop at Dow 11000? How about Dow 11,000,000? ;-)
'Nuff said...you are not an "independent" thinker, just an opportunistic Liberal, who will do and say whatever it takes to make sure you're on the "right" side. Your lack of scruples is appalling, but what else could we expect from your side? After all, your side actually believes that having someone who demeaned his fellow military men in Vietnam as a spokesperson is the same as "supporting the troops."
Have a nice life, and thank George W. Bush and the military for having the freedom to do so.
I say what I think, I speak for myself - not any "side"...and I certainly don't pay any attention to your ridiculous judgements of me.
... try to keep abreast of advances in technology.
I share with you gratitude for the blelssings of our capitalist system like advances in technology. Merry Christmas.
And a merry Christmas to you.
Sure you do. It's ok, you can admit your blind allegiance to the Lib party line...admitting it will be the first step towards truly thinking for yourself.
You are truly a rude moron.
Hmmm, just another Liberal tactic, I see. When reason fails you, play the personal attack card. Calling me a "rude moron" symbolizes your acceptance of the fact that you have no convincing argument, and is your white flag of surrender, which I will gracefully accept. Now go and sin no more.
You're so predictable.
Why don't you post on DU and get off FR, where nobody wnts you?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.