Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > alt.folklore.computers > #154844 > unrolled thread
| Started by | hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com |
|---|---|
| First post | 2015-12-07 10:48 -0800 |
| Last post | 2015-12-08 11:55 -0500 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 321 — 35 participants |
Back to article view | Back to alt.folklore.computers
1970--protesters seize computer center hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-12-07 10:48 -0800
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2015-12-07 23:49 -0500
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-12-07 22:38 -0800
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center maus <mausg@mail.com> - 2015-12-08 10:23 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-12-08 11:55 -0500
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Alfred Falk <falk@arc.ab.ca> - 2015-12-08 17:57 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-12-08 10:16 -0800
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2015-12-08 14:18 -0500
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2015-12-08 16:58 -0600
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2015-12-08 23:10 -0500
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2015-12-09 07:15 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2015-12-08 14:14 -0500
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-12-08 12:02 -0800
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center rpw3@rpw3.org (Rob Warnock) - 2015-12-09 01:07 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center maus <mausg@mail.com> - 2015-12-09 11:18 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-12-09 08:47 -0600
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2015-12-09 10:17 -0600
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2015-12-09 16:53 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2015-12-09 17:22 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center danny burstein <dannyb@panix.com> - 2015-12-09 17:39 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2015-12-09 18:21 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2015-12-10 04:56 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2015-12-09 14:06 -0600
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-12-09 12:20 -0800
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2015-12-09 19:32 -0600
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2015-12-09 21:53 -0600
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-12-10 15:23 -0500
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2015-12-10 23:03 -0500
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-12-11 22:56 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-12-11 07:17 -0800
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center mausg@mail.com - 2015-12-09 20:39 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-12-09 18:27 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-12-09 11:04 -0800
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-12-09 16:06 -0500
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center mausg@mail.com - 2015-12-10 10:36 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-12-10 07:53 -0800
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2015-12-10 16:27 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-12-10 19:11 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2015-12-10 17:58 -0600
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-12-11 01:04 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2015-12-11 15:18 -0600
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-12-11 07:16 -0800
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2015-12-11 15:21 +0100
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2015-12-09 17:47 -0500
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2015-12-09 22:17 -0600
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center "Ranger" <r5432@gmail.com> - 2015-12-11 17:20 +1100
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-12-11 08:25 -0600
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> - 2015-12-10 01:41 -0400
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center mausg@mail.com - 2015-12-10 10:44 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2015-12-10 17:51 -0600
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Jon Elson <jmelson@wustl.edu> - 2015-12-10 16:45 -0600
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-12-11 07:26 -0800
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Jon Elson <jmelson@wustl.edu> - 2015-12-11 14:29 -0600
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2015-12-11 15:31 +0100
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-12-12 08:11 -0500
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center mausg@mail.com - 2015-12-12 16:58 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-12-12 11:32 -0800
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-12-13 15:50 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-03 10:46 -0500
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-03 16:23 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-01-03 17:12 -0500
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-03 20:36 -0500
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-01-04 06:13 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-01-04 10:14 -0500
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-04 09:58 -0800
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-04 21:28 -0500
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Jon Elson <elson@pico-systems.com> - 2016-01-04 21:16 -0600
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-05 05:16 -0500
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Lawrence Statton <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2016-01-05 12:51 -0600
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-01-03 20:20 -0800
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-04 06:48 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-01-04 10:17 -0500
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-04 21:29 -0500
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-04 09:51 -0800
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-01-04 17:56 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-04 19:04 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-04 13:30 -0800
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-01-04 22:37 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Lawrence Statton <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2016-01-05 12:24 -0600
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-04 21:30 -0500
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Roger Blake <rogblake@iname.invalid> - 2016-01-05 05:02 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-05 05:19 -0500
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-01-05 10:22 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-05 05:38 -0500
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-01-05 11:19 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-05 06:35 -0500
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center mausg@mail.com - 2016-01-05 16:07 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Stan Barr <plan.b@bluesomatic.org> - 2016-01-06 07:49 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center mausg@mail.com - 2016-01-06 11:26 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-01-05 12:36 -0600
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-05 17:52 -0500
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Lawrence Statton <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2016-01-05 17:00 -0600
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center "879" <879@nospam.com> - 2016-01-07 15:44 +1100
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Joy Beeson <jbeeson@invalid.net.invalid> - 2016-01-07 23:56 -0400
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-08 07:33 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-08 06:37 -0500
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-01-08 17:32 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center "879" <879@nospam.com> - 2016-01-08 20:42 +1100
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-08 11:03 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center "879" <879@nospam.com> - 2016-01-09 06:14 +1100
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-08 06:52 -0500
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-06 07:48 -0800
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-06 18:50 -0500
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center mausg@mail.com - 2016-01-07 10:49 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-05 12:51 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-01-05 12:40 -0600
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-05 11:23 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-01-05 11:43 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-05 06:56 -0500
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-05 19:24 -0500
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Lawrence Statton <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2016-01-05 19:01 -0600
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-06 09:40 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-06 06:54 -0500
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-06 10:12 -0800
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-05 20:38 -0500
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-01-05 22:11 -0800
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-06 06:28 -0500
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-06 11:35 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-01-09 02:00 -0800
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-09 05:36 -0500
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-09 11:48 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-01-09 20:45 -0800
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-10 05:46 -0500
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-01-06 14:37 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-06 08:16 -0800
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-01-06 18:20 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-01-05 14:39 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-01-05 12:46 -0600
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-05 12:17 -0800
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-01-05 20:23 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-01-05 12:50 -0800
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-05 13:02 -0800
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-01-05 22:17 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-05 19:24 -0500
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-01-06 15:02 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-01-06 10:53 -0800
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-01-07 14:54 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-01-07 09:58 -0800
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-01-08 14:50 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2016-01-08 06:03 +1100
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-01-08 14:50 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2016-01-09 09:44 +1100
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center "879" <879@nospam.com> - 2016-01-07 15:14 +1100
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center "879" <879@nospam.com> - 2016-01-07 14:56 +1100
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-01-07 20:22 +0100
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center "879" <879@nospam.com> - 2016-01-08 15:19 +1100
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-01-08 10:42 +0100
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center mausg@mail.com - 2016-01-08 10:45 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-01-08 16:08 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center "879" <879@nospam.com> - 2016-01-09 05:29 +1100
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-01-05 16:39 -0500
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-01-06 14:18 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-01-06 18:20 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-06 07:28 -0800
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-01-06 13:14 -0500
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-01-07 14:54 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center mausg@mail.com - 2016-01-06 20:02 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center "879" <879@nospam.com> - 2016-01-07 14:30 +1100
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-01-06 08:16 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center mausg@mail.com - 2016-01-06 11:33 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-06 06:57 -0500
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-06 13:43 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center mausg@mail.com - 2016-01-06 15:20 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-06 16:14 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center mausg@mail.com - 2016-01-06 19:59 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-05 19:24 -0500
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Lawrence Statton <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2016-01-05 18:52 -0600
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-01-06 08:28 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-06 06:33 -0500
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-06 09:56 -0800
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Stan Barr <plan.b@bluesomatic.org> - 2016-01-07 08:25 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-06 06:54 -0500
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-01-06 08:06 -0600
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Stan Barr <plan.b@bluesomatic.org> - 2016-01-07 08:33 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-06 08:24 -0800
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-01-06 16:38 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-01-05 22:25 -0600
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-06 06:28 -0500
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-01-06 15:04 -0600
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-06 19:22 -0500
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-06 07:46 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-06 06:29 -0500
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-01-06 14:33 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-06 10:23 -0500
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-06 08:10 -0800
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Lawrence Statton <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2016-01-05 12:29 -0600
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Roger Blake <rogblake@iname.invalid> - 2016-01-05 18:50 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-01-05 19:11 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Roger Blake <rogblake@iname.invalid> - 2016-01-05 19:20 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-01-05 20:02 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Roger Blake <rogblake@iname.invalid> - 2016-01-05 20:12 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-01-05 20:39 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Roger Blake <rogblake@iname.invalid> - 2016-01-05 21:28 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-05 18:00 -0500
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-01-06 14:10 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center "879" <879@nospam.com> - 2016-01-07 15:49 +1100
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-01-05 16:51 -0500
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-06 07:36 -0800
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2016-01-07 13:24 +1100
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Lawrence Statton <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2016-01-05 13:52 -0600
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Roger Blake <rogblake@iname.invalid> - 2016-01-05 19:54 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-05 21:30 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Lawrence Statton <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2016-01-05 16:22 -0600
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-06 07:51 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-06 06:31 -0500
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-06 11:44 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-06 06:54 -0500
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-06 13:50 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-06 19:13 -0500
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-01-06 14:16 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-06 10:23 -0500
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-01-06 15:59 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-01-06 08:25 -0600
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-06 14:39 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Lawrence Statton <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2016-01-06 09:09 -0600
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-06 10:09 -0800
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-06 09:49 -0800
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-06 18:07 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-06 07:47 -0800
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-01-06 11:01 -0800
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center "879" <879@nospam.com> - 2016-01-07 15:30 +1100
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center "879" <879@nospam.com> - 2016-01-07 15:06 +1100
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-01-07 20:46 +0100
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center "879" <879@nospam.com> - 2016-01-08 15:44 +1100
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-01-08 10:49 +0100
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center "879" <879@nospam.com> - 2016-01-09 05:48 +1100
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-01-06 06:21 -0800
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center "879" <879@nospam.com> - 2016-01-07 13:21 +1100
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center "879" <879@nospam.com> - 2016-01-07 13:05 +1100
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-05 21:15 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Roger Blake <rogblake@iname.invalid> - 2016-01-05 21:30 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-07 05:23 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center "879" <879@nospam.com> - 2016-01-07 14:57 +1100
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-01-05 16:46 -0500
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-01-06 14:19 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-06 14:42 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-01-06 16:01 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-01-06 13:05 -0500
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Roger Blake <rogblake@iname.invalid> - 2016-01-07 03:42 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-07 07:45 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-07 08:30 -0800
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-01-07 09:55 -0800
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-07 17:01 -0500
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-01-07 09:52 -0800
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-01-11 12:34 -0500
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-01-11 10:22 -0800
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-01-05 16:25 -0600
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center mausg@mail.com - 2016-01-05 23:01 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Lawrence Statton <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2016-01-05 17:14 -0600
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-01-05 23:56 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-05 19:24 -0500
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-06 07:57 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center mausg@mail.com - 2016-01-06 11:14 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-06 06:54 -0500
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center mausg@mail.com - 2016-01-06 12:11 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-06 11:46 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-01-06 11:39 -0500
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-01-06 14:20 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-01-06 14:46 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center "879" <879@nospam.com> - 2016-01-07 15:32 +1100
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-01-07 11:33 -0600
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center "879" <879@nospam.com> - 2016-01-08 06:11 +1100
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-01-07 13:28 -0600
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center "879" <879@nospam.com> - 2016-01-08 15:30 +1100
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-05 17:57 -0500
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Lawrence Statton <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2016-01-05 17:12 -0600
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-05 18:55 -0500
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-06 07:59 -0800
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-06 18:58 -0500
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-07 12:04 -0500
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-07 18:04 -0500
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-08 06:55 -0500
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-08 06:37 -0500
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-01-05 23:56 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center "879" <879@nospam.com> - 2016-01-07 15:59 +1100
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-05 19:24 -0500
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-05 20:45 -0500
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-01-06 04:09 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-06 08:05 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center "879" <879@nospam.com> - 2016-01-07 15:38 +1100
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Uncle Steve <stevet810@gmail.com> - 2016-01-07 16:09 -0500
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-04 18:10 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-04 11:21 -0800
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-04 20:38 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-04 16:14 -0500
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-01-04 21:40 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Jon Elson <elson@pico-systems.com> - 2016-01-04 21:25 -0600
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-01-05 10:24 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-05 05:44 -0500
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-01-05 11:21 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-05 06:36 -0500
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-05 18:52 -0500
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-04 13:32 -0800
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-01-05 04:27 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-01-04 15:03 -0600
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-04 16:14 -0500
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-04 13:34 -0800
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-01-04 16:53 -0500
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-01-04 18:12 -0600
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-01-04 21:38 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-04 21:35 -0500
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-01-05 10:23 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-05 05:43 -0500
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-01-05 11:20 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-05 11:20 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-01-05 11:43 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-05 13:40 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-01-05 16:09 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-05 17:09 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-05 07:02 -0500
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-05 13:30 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-01-05 09:17 -0500
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-05 18:52 -0500
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Lawrence Statton <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2016-01-05 12:42 -0600
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Roger Blake <rogblake@iname.invalid> - 2016-01-05 18:53 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-05 19:24 -0500
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-05 21:19 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-01-05 21:40 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center mausg@mail.com - 2016-01-05 21:50 +0000
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2015-12-08 21:25 +0100
Re: 1970--protesters seize computer center Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-12-08 11:55 -0500
Page 7 of 17 — ← Prev page 1 … 5 6 [7] 8 9 … 17 Next page →
| From | Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-09 11:48 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <20160109114836.cac17f33dd0b77bfe0e29224@eircom.net> |
| In reply to | #156308 |
On Sat, 9 Jan 2016 05:36:28 -0500 "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote: > In article <vfm19b5h7us53v7j0qn88smr9fkkt2kn5g@4ax.com>, genew@telus.net > says... > > > > On Wed, 6 Jan 2016 06:28:51 -0500, "J. Clarke" > > <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > >In article <eubp8bhej06lkdkkhduq8lrf87uk4hhb8d@4ax.com>, > > >genew@telus.net says... > > >> > > >> On Tue, 5 Jan 2016 20:38:03 -0500, "J. Clarke" > > >> <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote: > > >> > > >> [snip] > > >> > > >> >Peter, there's nothing wrong with your ideas except that everybody > > >> >who needs help right now today is going to be dead of old age > > >> >before they can be implemented. > > >> > > >> Rather than focusing on the short-term only, it would be a good > > >> idea to plan and execute for the future. > > > > > >While that's fine in principle, it doesn't help the people who are out > > >of work now. > > > > Which is a short-sighted excuse for not doing anything for the > > long term. Do both short- and long-term activities. > > I've never suggested otherwise, but others seem to think that the "long > term" activity is the only one in which we should be engaging. Well if it came down to a choice between long term and short term then I think long term would be the right choice, but doing both is of course the right thing to do - unless of course you believe that doing nothing is the right thing to do. -- Steve O'Hara-Smith | Directable Mirror Arrays C:>WIN | A better way to focus the sun The computer obeys and wins. | licences available see You lose and Bill collects. | http://www.sohara.org/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-09 20:45 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <ibo39blgifp76jk3f1utcdaq1kq23p0ehu@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #156308 |
On Sat, 9 Jan 2016 05:36:28 -0500, "J. Clarke"
<j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
>In article <vfm19b5h7us53v7j0qn88smr9fkkt2kn5g@4ax.com>, genew@telus.net
>says...
[snip]
>> Which is a short-sighted excuse for not doing anything for the
>> long term. Do both short- and long-term activities.
>
>I've never suggested otherwise, but others seem to think that the "long
>term" activity is the only one in which we should be engaging.
I do not think that many people are like that. When one sees
only short-term activities being done, suggesting long-term activities
does not mean that the suggester thinks that only long-term activities
should be done but that long-term activities should be added to the
to-do list.
Sincerely,
Gene Wirchenko
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-10 05:46 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <MPG.30fc00a13cdce105989dd6@news.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #156342 |
In article <ibo39blgifp76jk3f1utcdaq1kq23p0ehu@4ax.com>, genew@telus.net says... > > On Sat, 9 Jan 2016 05:36:28 -0500, "J. Clarke" > <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote: > > >In article <vfm19b5h7us53v7j0qn88smr9fkkt2kn5g@4ax.com>, genew@telus.net > >says... > > [snip] > > >> Which is a short-sighted excuse for not doing anything for the > >> long term. Do both short- and long-term activities. > > > >I've never suggested otherwise, but others seem to think that the "long > >term" activity is the only one in which we should be engaging. > > I do not think that many people are like that. When one sees > only short-term activities being done, suggesting long-term activities > does not mean that the suggester thinks that only long-term activities > should be done but that long-term activities should be added to the > to-do list. The trouble is that the short term activities are not being done effectively. Spending on long term activities will just take away from that. And politicians being politicians, next years crop will find a way to screw up any long term activities started by this years crop anyway.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-06 14:37 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <XE9jy.64813$IX3.11610@fx36.iad> |
| In reply to | #156048 |
"J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> writes: >In article <1439153380.473731406.940627.peter_flass- >yahoo.com@news.eternal-september.org>, peter_flass@yahoo.com says... >> >> J. Clarke <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote: >> > In article <20160105112321.0126e7ef08ce50b4359dba41@eircom.net>, >> > steveo@eircom.net says... >> >> >> >> On 5 Jan 2016 10:22:33 GMT >> >> Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> wrote: >> >> >> >>> On 2016-01-05, J. Clarke <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>>> In article <20160105000414@news.eternal-september.org>, >> >>>> rogblake@iname.invalid says... >> >>>>> >> >>>>> On 2016-01-05, J. Clarke <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>>>>> So you deprive them of transportation and now they lose the crummy >> >>>>>> job that they do have. Big help _you_ are. >> >>>>> >> >>>>> _You_ are free to help them with your own time, effort, and money. >> >>>> >> >>>> So let's see, somebody has a car, the state prevents him from using it, >> >>>> and now it's my responsibility to drive him to work. You are an >> >>>> example of why we have so much poverty in the US--you have somebody >> >>>> who's barely hanging on and your solution is to push him over the edge. >> >>> >> >>> So, smartarse, what's your solution? >> >> >> >> Useful (subsidised if necessasry) public transport would be a big >> >> help for this kind of thing. Requiring a pre-sale inspection might reduce >> >> the chance of having a wreck dumped on our poor victim. >> > >> > Yep. Part of the problem is route planning--there may be 15 minute >> > service at a stop an hour and half walk from the job but one bus a day >> > at the stop that is 10 minutes away. Unfortunately it's not practical >> > to run buses from everywhere to everywhere. >> > >> >> So don't locate stuff "everywhere." People used to put a priority on a >> house or apartment on a subway or bus line. Companies didn't locate >> willy-nilly; most offices were downtown near transit hubs, and factories >> were also clumped. I've seen a picture of workers at a Ford plant in the >> 40's piling out of streetcars in front if the factory. The location thing >> can be handled by zoning. > >Peter, there's nothing wrong with your ideas except that everybody who >needs help right now today is going to be dead of old age before they >can be implemented. In any case, Peter's idea only works if there is one employer and employees are employed for life. If there are more than one employer and employees only stick around for 3 or 4 years (which is common today), then there is no way to live near work without frequent disruptive (particularly for children) moves. Visit LA or silicon valley and those notions would be quashed quickly.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-06 08:16 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <34d8bfe8-ac9f-402c-8ab8-f244f837b13d@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #156040 |
On Tuesday, January 5, 2016 at 7:24:27 PM UTC-5, Peter Flass wrote: > So don't locate stuff "everywhere." People used to put a priority on a > house or apartment on a subway or bus line. Companies didn't locate > willy-nilly; most offices were downtown near transit hubs, and factories > were also clumped. I've seen a picture of workers at a Ford plant in the > 40's piling out of streetcars in front if the factory. The location thing > can be handled by zoning. A metropolitan area usually has many political sub-divisions and zoning can't handle a large region. Also, in the US we like to give business a reasonably free hand in doing what it wants to do. In Philadelphia, there is a ton of unused land that is very close to major transit facilities (such as North Philadelphia). Unfortunately, no business wants to locate in that area, and most people wouldn't want to be employed there, either. It's a very high crime run-down area. So, instead, business will locate in an already crowded suburban location, served by highway only. The real solution is cleaning up the slums so the land isn't wasted, a problem in many cities. But it is a very tough problem to solve. During the Baltimore riots, TV news showed massive modern housing and commercial projects to redevelop the slums. Lots of money spent. But the projects were mostly empty. There's the case elsewhere, too.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-06 18:20 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <n6jlt70dj9@news4.newsguy.com> |
| In reply to | #156120 |
On 2016-01-06, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com <hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote:
> On Tuesday, January 5, 2016 at 7:24:27 PM UTC-5, Peter Flass wrote:
>
>> So don't locate stuff "everywhere." People used to put a priority on a
>> house or apartment on a subway or bus line. Companies didn't locate
>> willy-nilly; most offices were downtown near transit hubs, and factories
>> were also clumped. I've seen a picture of workers at a Ford plant in the
>> 40's piling out of streetcars in front if the factory. The location thing
>> can be handled by zoning.
>
> A metropolitan area usually has many political sub-divisions and
> zoning can't handle a large region. Also, in the US we like to give
> business a reasonably free hand in doing what it wants to do.
Here in the Vancouver area the provincial government attempted to deal
with this problem by establishing a board to handle transit over the
entire region. This board is unelected and answerable to no one, even
though it receives a cut of taxes. ("Taxation without representation
is TransLink." -- me) Recently there was a referendum over whether
to increase the provincial sales tax by 0.5% to help fund transit
improvements. It didn't pass; after past debacles and arrogant
behaviour by board members, too few people trust TransLink to
spend the money wisely.
--
/~\ cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid (Charlie Gibbs)
\ / I'm really at ac.dekanfrus if you read it the right way.
X Top-posted messages will probably be ignored. See RFC1855.
/ \ HTML will DEFINITELY be ignored. Join the ASCII ribbon campaign!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-05 14:39 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <D5SdnX1Krd_hSBbLnZ2dnUU78YOdnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #155957 |
On 05/01/2016 11:23, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote: > On 5 Jan 2016 10:22:33 GMT > Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> wrote: > >> On 2016-01-05, J. Clarke <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote: >>> In article <20160105000414@news.eternal-september.org>, >>> rogblake@iname.invalid says... >>>> >>>> On 2016-01-05, J. Clarke <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> So you deprive them of transportation and now they lose the crummy >>>>> job that they do have. Big help _you_ are. >>>> >>>> _You_ are free to help them with your own time, effort, and money. >>> >>> So let's see, somebody has a car, the state prevents him from using it, >>> and now it's my responsibility to drive him to work. You are an >>> example of why we have so much poverty in the US--you have somebody >>> who's barely hanging on and your solution is to push him over the edge. >> >> So, smartarse, what's your solution? > > Useful (subsidised if necessasry) public transport would be a big > help for this kind of thing. Requiring a pre-sale inspection might reduce > the chance of having a wreck dumped on our poor victim. > Devise a bus service that makes a profit from taking people to work and bringing them back at night. No subsidies - they are an act of sabotage. Include cost of buying new buses every few years. Possibly by permitting the drivers to have a day job.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-05 12:46 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <n6h2ts$op4$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #155968 |
On 1/5/2016 8:39 AM, Andrew Swallow wrote: > On 05/01/2016 11:23, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote: >> On 5 Jan 2016 10:22:33 GMT >> Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> wrote: >> >>> On 2016-01-05, J. Clarke <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> In article <20160105000414@news.eternal-september.org>, >>>> rogblake@iname.invalid says... >>>>> >>>>> On 2016-01-05, J. Clarke <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>> So you deprive them of transportation and now they lose the crummy >>>>>> job that they do have. Big help _you_ are. >>>>> >>>>> _You_ are free to help them with your own time, effort, and money. >>>> >>>> So let's see, somebody has a car, the state prevents him from >>>> using it, >>>> and now it's my responsibility to drive him to work. You are an >>>> example of why we have so much poverty in the US--you have somebody >>>> who's barely hanging on and your solution is to push him over the >>>> edge. >>> >>> So, smartarse, what's your solution? >> >> Useful (subsidised if necessasry) public transport would be a big >> help for this kind of thing. Requiring a pre-sale inspection might >> reduce >> the chance of having a wreck dumped on our poor victim. >> > Devise a bus service that makes a profit from taking people to work > and bringing them back at night. No subsidies - they are an act of > sabotage. Include cost of buying new buses every few years. Possibly > by permitting the drivers to have a day job. Shouldn't we get rid of "act of sabotage" subsidies for roads as well (fuel taxes and license fees pay for less than half of the cost)?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-05 12:17 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <f547fd95-c295-4dfb-9077-e9bec8780162@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #155981 |
On Tuesday, January 5, 2016 at 1:46:52 PM UTC-5, Dave Garland wrote: > Shouldn't we get rid of "act of sabotage" subsidies for roads as well > (fuel taxes and license fees pay for less than half of the cost)? Havings roads (and airways) pay _all_ of their direct and indirect costs would make transportation far more efficient by more honestly allocating costs and resources. In essence, living in suburbia or especially exurbia would cost a lot more, and force people to move into higher density areas where transport can be more efficient. However, if, say, gasoline were to cost $5/gallon, there would be massive riots in the U.S. (like there were in the 1970s). Americans think living in wide open spaces is an absolute natural right. They aren't gonna give up their split levels without a fight. So, national policy will continue to be to throw a few crumbs at transit so it can run a bus or two every hour, and at Amtrak to run an LD train a few times a week. We will bulldoze hundreds of square miles to build more airports and highways, plowing under homes and businesses. In reality, even just shifting the share-percentages only a few points would have a great deal of benefits, but the automotive and airline interests absolutely panic at that. They spend a lot of lobbyists to fight even miniscule projects. (I've been at public hearings where people show up to protest any new transit project--yet they have nothing to do with the specific project at hand.)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-05 20:23 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <df2n1kFqr68U5@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #155999 |
On 2016-01-05, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com <hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote:
> On Tuesday, January 5, 2016 at 1:46:52 PM UTC-5, Dave Garland wrote:
>
>> Shouldn't we get rid of "act of sabotage" subsidies for roads as well
>> (fuel taxes and license fees pay for less than half of the cost)?
>
> Havings roads (and airways) pay _all_ of their direct and indirect
> costs
Since indirect costs can only be estimated (IOW, guessed), the whole
argument is disingenuous.
--
Today is Setting Orange, the 33rd day of The Aftermath in the YOLD 3181
I don't have an attitude problem.
If you have a problem with my attitude, that's your problem.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-05 12:50 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <874mereooe.fsf@garlic.com> |
| In reply to | #155999 |
hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com writes: > Havings roads (and airways) pay _all_ of their direct and indirect > costs would make transportation far more efficient by more honestly > allocating costs and resources. In essence, living in suburbia > or especially exurbia would cost a lot more, and force people > to move into higher density areas where transport can be more > efficient. > > However, if, say, gasoline were to cost $5/gallon, there would be > massive riots in the U.S. (like there were in the 1970s). Americans > think living in wide open spaces is an absolute natural right. > They aren't gonna give up their split levels without a fight. past posts that highway design is based on expected ton-miles lifetime expectancy (80kN equivalent single axle loads - ESAL) ... road wear&tear, maintenance and replace is all based on heavy truck 18wheeler use (light trucks and autos play no factor). In effect the majority of consumer and light vehicle taxes are to subsidize heavy trucking. If heavy trucking was taxed directly proportional to their associated costs, their taxes would enormously skyrocket ... and taxes for other vehicles would be slashed (not as much as no tax for off-road vehicles ... but getting close). Of course, if heavy trucking paid their full, fair share, they might want to start demanding highway priorities. that is separate from cheap gas enabling all sort of life-style choices. past ESAL road design posts http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002j.html#41 Transportation http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003i.html#21 Spam Bomb http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003i.html#57 TGV in the USA? http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004c.html#20 Parallel programming again (Re: Intel announces "CT" aka http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004e.html#7 OT Global warming http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006f.html#44 The Pankian Metaphor http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006g.html#2 The Pankian Metaphor http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006g.html#5 The Pankian Metaphor http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006g.html#6 The Pankian Metaphor http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006g.html#7 The Pankian Metaphor http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006g.html#10 The Pankian Metaphor http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006g.html#12 The Pankian Metaphor http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006g.html#15 The Pankian Metaphor http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006g.html#19 The Pankian Metaphor http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006g.html#24 The Pankian Metaphor http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006g.html#26 The Pankian Metaphor http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006g.html#32 The Pankian Metaphor http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006g.html#35 The Pankian Metaphor http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006g.html#46 The Pankian Metaphor http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006g.html#48 The Pankian Metaphor http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006g.html#49 The Pankian Metaphor http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006g.html#50 The Pankian Metaphor http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006g.html#51 The Pankian Metaphor http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006g.html#52 The Pankian Metaphor http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006g.html#53 The Pankian Metaphor http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006g.html#54 The Pankian Metaphor http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006h.html#1 The Pankian Metaphor http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006h.html#2 The Pankian Metaphor http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006h.html#3 The Pankian Metaphor http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006h.html#5 The Pankian Metaphor http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006h.html#6 The Pankian Metaphor http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006h.html#11 The Pankian Metaphor http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006h.html#23 The Pankian Metaphor http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007n.html#97 Loads Weighing Heavily on Roads http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007q.html#21 Horrid thought about Politics, President Bush, and Democrats http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2008b.html#55 Toyota Sales for 2007 May Surpass GM http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2008b.html#56 Toyota Sales for 2007 May Surpass GM http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2008e.html#48 fraying infrastructure http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2008k.html#68 Historian predicts the end of 'science superpowers' http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2008l.html#25 dollar coins http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2008l.html#36 dollar coins http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2008l.html#37 dollar coins http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2008n.html#41 VMware Chief Says the OS Is History http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2010i.html#55 Favourite computer history books? http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2010k.html#40 taking down the machine - z9 series http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2010m.html#61 Idiotic cars driving themselves http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2010p.html#52 TCM's Moguls documentary series http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2011n.html#80 A Close Look at the Perry Tax Plan http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2011n.html#83 A Close Look at the Perry Tax Plan http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2013g.html#48 What Makes a bridge Bizarre? http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2013h.html#28 "Highway Patrol" back on TV http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2013h.html#29 "Highway Patrol" back on TV http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2014m.html#168 LEO http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2015b.html#47 Future of support for telephone rotary dial ? -- virtualization experience starting Jan1968, online at home since Mar1970
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-05 13:02 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <79935a60-89f9-41b1-8b24-50620dbd34e5@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #156003 |
On Tuesday, January 5, 2016 at 3:50:30 PM UTC-5, Anne & Lynn Wheeler wrote: > past posts that highway design is based on expected ton-miles lifetime > expectancy (80kN equivalent single axle loads - ESAL) ... road > wear&tear, maintenance and replace is all based on heavy truck 18wheeler > use (light trucks and autos play no factor). In effect the majority of > consumer and light vehicle taxes are to subsidize heavy trucking. If > heavy trucking was taxed directly proportional to their associated > costs, their taxes would enormously skyrocket ... and taxes for other > vehicles would be slashed (not as much as no tax for off-road vehicles > ... but getting close). Of course, if heavy trucking paid their full, > fair share, they might want to start demanding highway priorities. > > that is separate from cheap gas enabling all sort of life-style choices. But if heavy trucks had to pay their true fair share of highway construction, a lot more freight would be hauled by rail or manufactured locally. The railroad industry would be a lot healthier.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-05 22:17 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <n6hfei212nk@news3.newsguy.com> |
| In reply to | #156008 |
On 2016-01-05, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com <hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote: > On Tuesday, January 5, 2016 at 3:50:30 PM UTC-5, Anne & Lynn Wheeler wrote: > >> past posts that highway design is based on expected ton-miles lifetime >> expectancy (80kN equivalent single axle loads - ESAL) ... road >> wear&tear, maintenance and replace is all based on heavy truck 18wheeler >> use (light trucks and autos play no factor). In effect the majority of >> consumer and light vehicle taxes are to subsidize heavy trucking. If >> heavy trucking was taxed directly proportional to their associated >> costs, their taxes would enormously skyrocket ... and taxes for other >> vehicles would be slashed (not as much as no tax for off-road vehicles >> ... but getting close). Of course, if heavy trucking paid their full, >> fair share, they might want to start demanding highway priorities. >> >> that is separate from cheap gas enabling all sort of life-style choices. > > But if heavy trucks had to pay their true fair share of highway > construction, a lot more freight would be hauled by rail or > manufactured locally. The railroad industry would be a lot > healthier. So would local manufacturers. -- /~\ cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid (Charlie Gibbs) \ / I'm really at ac.dekanfrus if you read it the right way. X Top-posted messages will probably be ignored. See RFC1855. / \ HTML will DEFINITELY be ignored. Join the ASCII ribbon campaign!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-05 19:24 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <630755369.473732126.237146.peter_flass-yahoo.com@news.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #156022 |
Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote: > On 2016-01-05, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com <hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote: > >> On Tuesday, January 5, 2016 at 3:50:30 PM UTC-5, Anne & Lynn Wheeler wrote: >> >>> past posts that highway design is based on expected ton-miles lifetime >>> expectancy (80kN equivalent single axle loads - ESAL) ... road >>> wear&tear, maintenance and replace is all based on heavy truck 18wheeler >>> use (light trucks and autos play no factor). In effect the majority of >>> consumer and light vehicle taxes are to subsidize heavy trucking. If >>> heavy trucking was taxed directly proportional to their associated >>> costs, their taxes would enormously skyrocket ... and taxes for other >>> vehicles would be slashed (not as much as no tax for off-road vehicles >>> ... but getting close). Of course, if heavy trucking paid their full, >>> fair share, they might want to start demanding highway priorities. >>> >>> that is separate from cheap gas enabling all sort of life-style choices. >> >> But if heavy trucks had to pay their true fair share of highway >> construction, a lot more freight would be hauled by rail or >> manufactured locally. The railroad industry would be a lot >> healthier. > Actually, I think the railroad industry is fairly healthy, and so does Warren Buffet. It's passenger rail that's not doing so well. > So would local manufacturers. > -- Pete
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-06 15:02 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <PM000528AB79329F7B@aca428bc.ipt.aol.com> |
| In reply to | #156022 |
Charlie Gibbs wrote: > On 2016-01-05, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com <hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote: > >> On Tuesday, January 5, 2016 at 3:50:30 PM UTC-5, Anne & Lynn Wheeler wrote: >> >>> past posts that highway design is based on expected ton-miles lifetime >>> expectancy (80kN equivalent single axle loads - ESAL) ... road >>> wear&tear, maintenance and replace is all based on heavy truck 18wheeler >>> use (light trucks and autos play no factor). In effect the majority of >>> consumer and light vehicle taxes are to subsidize heavy trucking. If >>> heavy trucking was taxed directly proportional to their associated >>> costs, their taxes would enormously skyrocket ... and taxes for other >>> vehicles would be slashed (not as much as no tax for off-road vehicles >>> ... but getting close). Of course, if heavy trucking paid their full, >>> fair share, they might want to start demanding highway priorities. >>> >>> that is separate from cheap gas enabling all sort of life-style choices. >> >> But if heavy trucks had to pay their true fair share of highway >> construction, a lot more freight would be hauled by rail or >> manufactured locally. The railroad industry would be a lot >> healthier. > > So would local manufacturers. > But not food growers. The people today who don't want to cook meals aren't going to can and preserve winter and spring food each summer. If the transportation costs of trucking is increased, then the costs of goods and services trucked in will increase. It may be more "efficent" for locals to pay for the maintenance of roads. /BAH
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-06 10:53 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <87si2a35gv.fsf@garlic.com> |
| In reply to | #156104 |
jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> writes: > If the transportation costs of trucking is increased, then the costs > of goods and services trucked in will increase. It may be more > "efficent" for locals to pay for the maintenance of roads. More efficient transportion supposedly supports (supposedly) more efficient large corporate food production. One way of characterizing/profiling efficiency is by costs, various kinds of tax subsidies distort costs ... and therefor distorts perception of efficiency. Related arguments are about real costs/measures of all kinds of legislation, there can be claims made justifying various kinds of legislation (including taxes) ... but rarely is there any effort to substantiate the claims (especially if there is actually totally different motivation). trivial example is national disaster flood insurance ... claim is that at least half of the national disaster flood insurance is paid to the same people along the mississippi, year after year (effectively a federal economic subsidy for those people). In the early 80s, congress passed a law that those people get paid one more time to move off of the designated flood plains, but it was illegal to keep paying the same people to rebuild on the same flood plains, year after year. several recent articles about how that law was never enforced ... people continually getting to rebuild on the same flood plains. past posts http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001.html#41 Where do the filesystem and RAID system belong? http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001.html#42 Where do the filesystem and RAID system belong? http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2008n.html#67 VMware Chief Says the OS Is History http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2009m.html#41 August 7, 1944: today is the 65th Anniversary of the Birth of the Computer http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2012o.html#18 other days around me http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2013n.html#48 'Free Unix!': The world-changing proclamationmade30yearsagotoday http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2015f.html#27 Federal Subsidies another example is fed. government started offering irrigation water for rice growers in otherwise semi-arid regions. The real cost of growing rice in semi-arid region is much higher than in traditional rice growing environments ... but the fed. governement water subsidy totally distorted those costs. past posts http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006g.html#15 The Pankian Metaphor http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006g.html#41 The Pankian Metaphor http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2008h.html#19 The Return of Ada http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2011n.html#80 A Close Look at the Perry Tax Plan one of the arguments for flat tax was that (distorted) taxes can result in less efficient, non-optimal business decisions/choices. I've periodically referenced roundtable broadcast at national economist meeting a few years ago. That current federal tax code costs 5-6% of GDP. Going to (simplified) flat tax gains 2-3% GDP in (wasted) time people spend dealing with the tax code and 2-3% GDP in people making more optimal business decisions (there is intense lobbying tax preparers & related organizations against any simplification of tax code). past posts http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2009i.html#13 64 Cores -- IBM is showing a prototype already http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2009p.html#39 Opinions on the 'Unix Haters' Handbook http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2010j.html#88 taking down the machine - z9 series http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2010p.html#14 Rare Apple I computer sells for $216,000 in London http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2010p.html#74 TCM's Moguls documentary series http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2011d.html#20 The first personal computer (PC) http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2011i.html#20 Happy 100th Birthday, IBM! http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2011n.html#80 A Close Look at the Perry Tax Plan http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2011o.html#4 The men who crashed the world http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2012h.html#14 Monopoly/ Cartons of Punch Cards http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2013e.html#70 What Makes an Architecture Bizarre? http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2013e.html#87 What Makes an Architecture Bizarre? http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2013f.html#69 The cloud is killing traditional hardware and software http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2013g.html#80 'Big four' accountants 'use knowledge of Treasury to help rich avoid tax' http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2013g.html#81 Ireland feels the heat from Apple tax row http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2013g.html#86 How Wall Street Defanged Dodd-Frank http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2013i.html#79 What Makes an Architecture Bizarre? http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2013i.html#80 What Makes an Architecture Bizarre? http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2014b.html#30 Royal Pardon For Turing http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2014b.html#33 Royal Pardon For Turing http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2014b.html#57 Royal Pardon For Turing http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2014f.html#14 Before the Internet: The golden age of online services http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2014l.html#3 HP splits, again http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2014m.html#1 weird apple trivia http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2014m.html#133 LEO http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2015.html#52 Report: Tax Evasion, Avoidance Costs United States $100 Billion A Year http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2015e.html#48 These are the companies abandoning the U.S. to dodge taxes http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2015e.html#80 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2015e.html#96 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2015f.html#10 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2015f.html#13 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 -- virtualization experience starting Jan1968, online at home since Mar1970
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-07 14:54 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <PM000528BFA163085B@aca411c3.ipt.aol.com> |
| In reply to | #156143 |
Anne & Lynn Wheeler wrote: > jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> writes: >> If the transportation costs of trucking is increased, then the costs >> of goods and services trucked in will increase. It may be more >> "efficent" for locals to pay for the maintenance of roads. > > More efficient transportion supposedly supports (supposedly) more > efficient large corporate food production. One way of > characterizing/profiling efficiency is by costs, various kinds of tax > subsidies distort costs ... and therefor distorts perception of > efficiency. > > Related arguments are about real costs/measures of all kinds of > legislation, there can be claims made justifying various kinds of > legislation (including taxes) ... but rarely is there any effort to > substantiate the claims (especially if there is actually totally > different motivation). I've seen the attitude "I don't use the highways so why should I have to pay for them?". People, who have this attitude, don't seem to know how stuff gets into the stores and the work involved to supply their needs. > > trivial example is national disaster flood insurance ... claim is that > at least half of the national disaster flood insurance is paid to the > same people along the mississippi, year after year (effectively a > federal economic subsidy for those people). In the early 80s, congress > passed a law that those people get paid one more time to move off of the > designated flood plains, but it was illegal to keep paying the same > people to rebuild on the same flood plains, year after year. several > recent articles about how that law was never enforced ... people > continually getting to rebuild on the same flood plains. past posts Of course. Now check the cost of their premiums. When I was trying to buy flood insurance in Mass., the premium was $600 while the premium for the senator from Mississippi was $300. His place was closer to sea level and water than mine. and then I looked at the rules of getting paid for damages. That's rigged, too. > http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001.html#41 Where do the filesystem and RAID system belong? > http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001.html#42 Where do the filesystem and RAID system belong? > http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2008n.html#67 VMware Chief Says the OS Is History > http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2009m.html#41 August 7, 1944: today is the 65th Anniversary of the Birth of the Computer > http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2012o.html#18 other days around me > http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2013n.html#48 'Free Unix!': The world-changing proclamationmade30yearsagotoday > http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2015f.html#27 Federal Subsidies > > another example is fed. government started offering irrigation water for > rice growers in otherwise semi-arid regions. The real cost of growing > rice in semi-arid region is much higher than in traditional rice growing > environments ... but the fed. governement water subsidy totally > distorted those costs. past posts > http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006g.html#15 The Pankian Metaphor > http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006g.html#41 The Pankian Metaphor > http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2008h.html#19 The Return of Ada > http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2011n.html#80 A Close Look at the Perry Tax Plan If you want to find more corruption, look into water supply. That's going to be a big problem within the next (est.) 10 years. > > one of the arguments for flat tax was that (distorted) taxes can result > in less efficient, non-optimal business decisions/choices. > > I've periodically referenced roundtable broadcast at national economist > meeting a few years ago. That current federal tax code costs 5-6% of > GDP. Going to (simplified) flat tax gains 2-3% GDP in (wasted) time > people spend dealing with the tax code and 2-3% GDP in people making > more optimal business decisions (there is intense lobbying tax preparers > & related organizations against any simplification of tax code). Why don't I ever hear the argument that a flat tax would promote creation of new business? anyone trying to start out is up to his/her ears in paperwork w.r.t. business and employment taxes, fees, and regulations. /BAH > past > posts > http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2009i.html#13 64 Cores -- IBM is showing a prototype already > http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2009p.html#39 Opinions on the 'Unix Haters' Handbook > http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2010j.html#88 taking down the machine - z9 series > http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2010p.html#14 Rare Apple I computer sells for $216,000 in London > http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2010p.html#74 TCM's Moguls documentary series > http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2011d.html#20 The first personal computer (PC) > http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2011i.html#20 Happy 100th Birthday, IBM! > http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2011n.html#80 A Close Look at the Perry Tax Plan > http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2011o.html#4 The men who crashed the world > http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2012h.html#14 Monopoly/ Cartons of Punch Cards > http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2013e.html#70 What Makes an Architecture Bizarre? > http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2013e.html#87 What Makes an Architecture Bizarre? > http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2013f.html#69 The cloud is killing traditional hardware and software > http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2013g.html#80 'Big four' accountants 'use knowledge of Treasury to help rich avoid tax' > http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2013g.html#81 Ireland feels the heat from Apple tax row > http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2013g.html#86 How Wall Street Defanged Dodd-Frank > http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2013i.html#79 What Makes an Architecture Bizarre? > http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2013i.html#80 What Makes an Architecture Bizarre? > http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2014b.html#30 Royal Pardon For Turing > http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2014b.html#33 Royal Pardon For Turing > http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2014b.html#57 Royal Pardon For Turing > http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2014f.html#14 Before the Internet: The golden age of online services > http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2014l.html#3 HP splits, again > http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2014m.html#1 weird apple trivia > http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2014m.html#133 LEO > http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2015.html#52 Report: Tax Evasion, Avoidance Costs United States $100 Billion A Year > http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2015e.html#48 These are the companies abandoning the U.S. to dodge taxes > http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2015e.html#80 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 > http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2015e.html#96 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 > http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2015f.html#10 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 > http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2015f.html#13 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 >
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-07 09:58 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <87a8ohp8z4.fsf@garlic.com> |
| In reply to | #156201 |
jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> writes: > Why don't I ever hear the argument that a flat tax would promote > creation of new business? anyone trying to start out is up to his/her > ears in paperwork w.r.t. business and employment taxes, fees, and > regulations. part of it is included in the 2-3% loss in GDP because of overhead dealing with the current complexity -- virtualization experience starting Jan1968, online at home since Mar1970
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-08 14:50 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <PM000528D3B62D74FF@aca202dc.ipt.aol.com> |
| In reply to | #156217 |
Anne & Lynn Wheeler wrote: > jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> writes: >> Why don't I ever hear the argument that a flat tax would promote >> creation of new business? anyone trying to start out is up to his/her >> ears in paperwork w.r.t. business and employment taxes, fees, and >> regulations. > > part of it is included in the 2-3% loss in GDP because of overhead > dealing with the current complexity > Ok. Then I would guess that those numbers are low. /BAH
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-08 06:03 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <df7r4jF6dv0U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #156201 |
"jmfbahciv" <See.above@aol.com> wrote in message news:PM000528BFA163085B@aca411c3.ipt.aol.com... > Anne & Lynn Wheeler wrote: >> jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> writes: >>> If the transportation costs of trucking is increased, then the costs >>> of goods and services trucked in will increase. It may be more >>> "efficent" for locals to pay for the maintenance of roads. >> >> More efficient transportion supposedly supports (supposedly) more >> efficient large corporate food production. One way of >> characterizing/profiling efficiency is by costs, various kinds of tax >> subsidies distort costs ... and therefor distorts perception of >> efficiency. >> >> Related arguments are about real costs/measures of all kinds of >> legislation, there can be claims made justifying various kinds of >> legislation (including taxes) ... but rarely is there any effort to >> substantiate the claims (especially if there is actually totally >> different motivation). > > I've seen the attitude "I don't use the highways so why should I have > to pay for them?". People, who have this attitude, don't seem to know > how stuff gets into the stores and the work involved to supply their > needs. > >> >> trivial example is national disaster flood insurance ... claim is that >> at least half of the national disaster flood insurance is paid to the >> same people along the mississippi, year after year (effectively a >> federal economic subsidy for those people). In the early 80s, congress >> passed a law that those people get paid one more time to move off of the >> designated flood plains, but it was illegal to keep paying the same >> people to rebuild on the same flood plains, year after year. several >> recent articles about how that law was never enforced ... people >> continually getting to rebuild on the same flood plains. past posts > > Of course. Now check the cost of their premiums. When I was trying > to buy flood insurance in Mass., the premium was $600 while the > premium for the senator from Mississippi was $300. His place was > closer to sea level and water than mine. > > and then I looked at the rules of getting paid for damages. That's > rigged, too. > >> http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001.html#41 Where do the filesystem and RAID > system belong? >> http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001.html#42 Where do the filesystem and RAID > system belong? >> http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2008n.html#67 VMware Chief Says the OS Is > History >> http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2009m.html#41 August 7, 1944: today is the >> 65th > Anniversary of the Birth of the Computer >> http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2012o.html#18 other days around me >> http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2013n.html#48 'Free Unix!': The >> world-changing > proclamationmade30yearsagotoday >> http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2015f.html#27 Federal Subsidies >> >> another example is fed. government started offering irrigation water for >> rice growers in otherwise semi-arid regions. The real cost of growing >> rice in semi-arid region is much higher than in traditional rice growing >> environments ... but the fed. governement water subsidy totally >> distorted those costs. past posts >> http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006g.html#15 The Pankian Metaphor >> http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006g.html#41 The Pankian Metaphor >> http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2008h.html#19 The Return of Ada >> http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2011n.html#80 A Close Look at the Perry Tax >> Plan > > If you want to find more corruption, look into water supply. That's > going to be a big problem within the next (est.) 10 years. >> >> one of the arguments for flat tax was that (distorted) taxes can result >> in less efficient, non-optimal business decisions/choices. >> >> I've periodically referenced roundtable broadcast at national economist >> meeting a few years ago. That current federal tax code costs 5-6% of >> GDP. Going to (simplified) flat tax gains 2-3% GDP in (wasted) time >> people spend dealing with the tax code and 2-3% GDP in people making >> more optimal business decisions (there is intense lobbying tax preparers >> & related organizations against any simplification of tax code). > Why don't I ever hear the argument that a flat tax would promote > creation of new business? You would if you had enough of a clue to get a decent internet service and use it. https://www.google.com/search?q=flat+tax+small+business > anyone trying to start out is up to his/her ears in paperwork > w.r.t. business and employment taxes, fees, and regulations. BULLSHIT and I've done it and just helped one of the kids doing it just lately too. And the bulk of new business just uses an accountant to handle their tax anyway.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 7 of 17 — ← Prev page 1 … 5 6 [7] 8 9 … 17 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | alt.folklore.computers
csiph-web