HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: rdonahue@spdcc.com (Bob Donahue)
Subject: Re: Efficiency
Organization: insert anything here
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 1992 14:13:45 GMT

dlw@odi.com writes:
>rdonahue@spdcc.com (Bob Donahue) writes:

>>   Okay, so we make everyone more efficient.  then we need fewer workers.
>>   Then we have more unemployment, [...]

>On All Things Considered today, they reported that the above effect
>actually appears to have happened over the last two months.
>Productivity is up, but employment is not up; more is getting
>produced, but by the same number of people.

>However, that's because of the current recession and the 80's debt
>overhang; there's no evidence that it's a long-term trend, and it
>would be surprising if it were.  Because:

>>	   Greater efficiency means fewer workers for a specific task.
>>   It also means less $$$ wasted which can be channeled into new
>>   initiatives utilizing the workers no longer needed for the 
>>   initial task.  This in turn provides more productivity (since
>>   we're getting all these other things accomplished that we
>>   didn't have before when we had hired you) and an overall 
>>   increase in the status of life.

>Exactly.  In the long run, and when the economy is out of the present
>doldrums (sooner or later!), new businesses and jobs will get created.
>(The increased productivity of the constant number of workers that
>we are seeing now will, in itself, help boost the economy.)


	Yes, IFF (if andonly if) the $$$ does get rechanneled.
The way of the 80's was "keep the profits" - this is where all the
extra $$$ got put into the top-level people's pockets.  It's the
first order effect of trickle-down economics.  Give a rich person
$$$ and he'll keep a percentage and reinvest (for profit) the rest.
Give a poor person $$$ and he'll spend it.  In all cases there 
is the SAME finite amount of $$$ --- but in the first it is not
going through the system with the same efficiency.  IFF the $$$
gets redistibuted into new programs/initiatives, etc., then things
work well.  But the last decade has seen things like corporate
buyouts (turning jobs, etc. into ca$h for the buyers - no redistribution),
moves to other countries (jobs lost, no redistribution in our economy),
cutting of taxes to the rich/corporations (no redistribution to
social programs), etc.  Just where did all the S&L $$$ magically disappear
to?  And who gets to pay for it?

	The economy needs a infusion of $$$ to get ti started again.
The only way that will happen it to give the rich an economic
laxative.  And an enema.

BBC
Xref: sparky ne.politics:2244 ne.general:2433 talk.politics.misc:43627
From: borden@head-cfa.harvard.edu (Dave Borden)
Newsgroups: ne.politics,ne.general,talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: VOICE-MAIL FOR THE HOMELESS AND POOR
Date: 3 Sep 92 20:12:39 GMT
Reply-To: borden@m5.harvard.edu
Distribution: usa
Organization: Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory, Cambridge, MA,  USA

In article <1992Sep03.172734.58308@kronos.com> richb@kronos.com (Rich Braun) writes:
>Dave Borden, borden@m5.harvard.edu writes:
>> not having a phone is definitely a real obstacle to
>>finding gainful employment. ...  And it would probably be
>>inexpensive and easy to provide - my voice-mail is only $6 a month, and
>>some of that is the phone company's profit.
>
>A great idea, but my cop-out is this:  the system would probably have
>to provide each person with a separate phone number (not one of those
>god-awful touch-tone receptionists), or else it would be a turnoff to
>prospective employers.  That means a pretty hefty phone bill, probably
>on the order of the $6 per month per line you mentioned.  And the equip-
>ment to run the system could run into the thousands of dollars, especially
>if it supports the DID (direct inward-dial) capability I mentioned.
>
Each person could have an extension number; I don't think that would be a
big turn-off.

I've received a number of email responses on this subject - apparently, this
is being done in Seattle and is actually working well - it was discusses
recently on NPR.  I'm going to see if I can find out who's doing it and get
in touch with them for advice.  Anyone who would like to be kept informed,
send me email and I'll put you on my list.

  - Dave Borden
    borden@m5.harvard.edu
From: murph@buscard.fidonet.org (Brian Murphy)
Newsgroups: ne.politics
Subject: Smaller government means MORE money for the poor
Date: 25 Aug 92 15:18:22 GMT
Reply-To: murph@buscard.fidonet.org (Brian Murphy)
Organization: The Business Card (BBS), Lawrence, MA - Data: 508-682-5329

yodaiken@chelm.cs.umass.edu (victor yodaiken) writes:

> In article <y54PPB1w165w@buscard.fidonet.org> murph@buscard.fidonet.org (Bria
> >
> >Hmmmm....  No, I don't think there's anything inhumane about anything I've
> 
> Inhumane: lacking in pity or kindness.

Look, I have as much pity as the next guy for the downtrodden but I don't go
around working FOR them.  I don't think you do, either.  Neither of us spend
every working day feeling great that every penny we earn today is going to
help some "needy" person.

What about our own personal obligations?  Obligations to spouses, families,
parents, community?  Do they fit in anywhere?  Does EVERYTHING have to come
from taxes where we have precious little say over where the money is spent -
AND pay for the bureaucracy to administer it?  Why is it such a bad idea to
stop giving the tax money to the government to fund their social programs and
experiments and let us spend it where we think it'll do the most good?  Maybe
I think the Red Cross of my Church is a better investment in alleviating the
suffering of the downtrodden?  Maybe I think my kids need shoes more than your
kids or someone else's kids?  Maybe I think your kids DO need shoes more than
mine - isn't it better that I walk next door and give you the shoes than to
send the money to Washington where the money left over will only pay for
shoelaces?

                                      - - - Murph

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
   The Business Card (BBS), Lawrence, Massachusetts - Data: (508) 682-5329
   SysAdmin:  murph@buscard.fidonet.org / ...!ulowell!wizvax!buscard!murph
From: scott@kronos.com (Scott Riegelhaupt-Herzig)
Newsgroups: ne.politics
Subject: Re: Why Kids are Violent
Date: 31 Aug 92 15:41:25 GMT
Organization: Kronos Inc. / Waltham, MA
Disclaimer: This posting is a personal opinion and not that of Kronos Inc.

In article <1992Aug28.213125.63770@kronos.com> ed@kronos.com (Ed Baker) writes:
>In article <4e1uPB1w165w@buscard.fidonet.org> murph@buscard.fidonet.org (Brian Murphy) writes:
>>
>>No discipline.  We should be able to live in a world where this mother could
>>spank her child and not get raised eyebrows and second guessing for it.
>>
>>You give that kid a good couple of whallops and he'll sit still for story
>>hour!
>>
>>                                      - - - Murph
>You are the adult;
>they are the children.  You can understand things that they can't.

Ed...

After having read a number of Murph's postings, I think that you're giving 
him too much credit...:-)

					<S>


Scott P. Riegelhaupt-Herzig             scott@kronos.com
Kronos, Inc.
62 Fourth Avenue
Waltham, MA   02154
+1 617 487-4743
From: gjc@mitech.com (George J. Carrette)
Newsgroups: ne.politics
Subject: Re: Flat taxes
Date: 3 Sep 92 12:36:07 GMT
Organization: Mitech Corporation, Concord MA

In article <1992Sep2.140913.28621@m5.harvard.edu>, borden@head-cfa.harvard.edu (Dave Borden) writes:
> Can you
> believe that Colorado actually taxes groceries?  The rate is 7.9%!

Sweden also taxes groceries. And the rate is 25% !!!
From: gjc@mitech.com (George J. Carrette)
Newsgroups: ne.politics
Subject: Re: Observations on schools & money
Date: 1 Sep 92 09:35:40 GMT
Organization: Mitech Corporation, Concord MA

In article <1992Aug31.141745.26529@m5.harvard.edu>, borden@head-cfa.harvard.edu (Dave Borden) writes:
> About a year and a
> half ago, I met a high school physics teacher who teaches in one of the
> public schools in Massachusetts (I don't remember the town - it was a
> small suburb.  He told me that he had one physics class, in which all levels
> of students from beginning to advanced, were lumped together. 

Physics is itself considered an advanced course. It is optional and
not a requirement for graduation. It is -rare- to have further subdivisions
within an advanced level course.

And that was the case when I went to school in PG County Maryland in 1975.

If you know of any public school in the country that has more than one
level of physics course, please site it as an example.

> The reason
> for this was that that was all the school system could afford.  

No, you have picked a pretty bad example of "A PROBLEM" caused by lack of money.

My personal opinion is that physics without differential equations is
pretty much a waste of time anyway. Certainly I've seen nothing in
high-school physics that teaches anything worthwhile about "scientific method"
or related areas. Biology and Ecology subjects do a lot better in high school,
judging by the textbooks available.

-gjc
From: murph@buscard.fidonet.org (Brian Murphy)
Newsgroups: ne.politics
Subject: Re: Bearing arms: our first line of defense
Date: 25 Aug 92 15:32:57 GMT
Reply-To: murph@buscard.fidonet.org (Brian Murphy)
Organization: The Business Card (BBS), Lawrence, MA - Data: 508-682-5329

mgelman@cyclades.ma30.bull.com (Michael A. Gelman) writes:

> Here's my idea for gun control:  Anyone who want a weapon can have one 
> (assuming a background checks similar to motor vehicle registration), 
> except the only type of weapons you can have are bazookas or similar
> very large, unweildy weapons.

Heh!  Sure, though, why not?  Still, I wouldn't want to ban those stealth
weapons called Saturday Night Specials.

                                      - - - Murph

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
   The Business Card (BBS), Lawrence, Massachusetts - Data: (508) 682-5329
   SysAdmin:  murph@buscard.fidonet.org / ...!ulowell!wizvax!buscard!murph
Newsgroups: ne.politics
From: dbrooks@osf.org (David Brooks)
Subject: Re: Corporate Tax Ballot Question
Organization: Open Software Foundation
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1992 20:28:54 GMT

richb@kronos.com (Rich Braun) writes:
|> Braude of TEAM was trying to use the threat of this ballot question
|> last year to gain concessions from the business lobby.  Failing those
|> concessions, he went ahead with this initiative petition.
...
|> The statewide questions are numbered 1 through 4 this year, and I
|> don't remember the order.

The TEAM question is #3.  Some commentators have suggested that this will,
ironically, cost them potential votes: there are enough people with "No on
3, it goes too far" running around in their heads, not to mention all the
bumper stickers still legible, that it could have some continuing anti-3
effect.
-- 
David Brooks					dbrooks@osf.org
Open Software Foundation			uunet!osf.org!dbrooks
141 more days of Bush Presidency!
Newsgroups: ne.politics,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush,talk.politics.misc
From: Terri Buchman <buchman@osf.org>
Subject: Observations on schools & money
X-Xxmessage-Id: <A6C121BE36020898@devmac15.osf.org>
X-Xxdate: Wed, 26 Aug 92 11:55:42 GMT
Organization: Open Software Foundation
X-Useragent: Nuntius v1.1.1d9
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 15:52:48 GMT

Throwing money.at schools doesn't help?????

Then how come Weston, Brookline, Wellesley & Lexington schools
regularly are ranked among the best in MA.  Could it be because
they are well funded as well as strongly supported.  I think we
need to reform the way that we get money for the schools.  I
would favor the proposals that ditch the property tax as the
way to pay for school costs and substitute a state-wide sales
tax.  This could be distributed far more equitably than the
current system. 

BTW, what is the status of the case in NH where the parents
filed a class action suit against the state over the school
funding system.  The parents wanted state funding via a
state-wide tax and the elimination of the property tax as the
sole school funding vehicle.  Where does that case stand now? 

Money is a number 1 priority.  I am currently involved in
trying to raise funds for my daughter's public school (K-6) to
buy computer equipment.  We have been stymied by several
problems, including:
-  Lack of funds.  This affects everything from books to
technology.
-  Lack of teacher understanding of the uses or benefits of
computers in the      classroom.  We need more money to send
the teachers to class to learn how to use the stuff we want to
get or the stuff won''t get used.
-  Lack of parent involvement.  Sometimes it seems like nobody
cares.  No wonder the schools make such an easy target for tax
cutters.  The natural consituency that should be supporting
more effort in the schools and more funding in the legislature
doesn't care and doesn't protest.  Other, louder voices are
heard and moeny goes elsewhere.  We need something like AARP
for the parents and kids to see that the money is appropriated.
-  The "kitchen sink" school.  Schools can't be daycare centers
and dispense primary medical care and instill all morals and
values and care for drop out and problem children and still
carry out their primary function as teaching institutions.  It
just can't be done.  The money and personnel are not there.  
Somehow we have to come up with a set of priorities for what
the school should be doing.  The present system of expecting
everything is doomed to failure.

TerriB.
From: stamant@titanic.cs.umass.edu (Robert Stamant)
Newsgroups: ne.politics
Subject: Re: Bearing arms: our first line of defense
Date: 25 Aug 92 17:09:19 GMT
Reply-To: stamant@titanic.cs.umass.edu (Robert Stamant)
Organization: University of Massachusetts, Amherst

This posting shouldn't be construed as being for or against gun control.  I'm
just interested in what the statistics show.

In article <DRG.92Aug24111247@bubba.ma30.bull.com> drg@bubba.ma30.bull.com (Daniel R Guilderson) writes:
>The following statistics were compiled from many different sources
>(send me email for a list):
>
>                 H O M I C I D E
>                                  PER         ABSOLUTE
>RANK  COUNTRY                     100,000     NUMBERS
>====  ==========================  =======     ========
> 01   Lesotho                     140.81       1,592
> 02   Bahamas                      22.88          45
> 03   Guyana                       22.21         610
> 05   Netherlands Antilles         12.47          29
> 06   Iraq                         11.94       1,243
> 07   Sri Lanka                    11.92       1,597
> 08   Cyprus                       11.11          71
> 09   Trinidad & Tobago            10.41         113
> 10   Jamaica                      10.25         205
> 11   United States                 9.60      18,155
> 12   Kuwait                        9.18          78
> 13   Tanzania                      8.98       1,295
> 14   Kenya                         8.66       1,047
> 15   Madagascar                    8.14         692
> 16   Burma                         8.06       2,304
> 17   Venezuela                     7.19         834
> 18   Netherlands                   7.15         964
> 19   Chile                         6.69         723
> 20   St.Kitts-Nevis-Anguilla       6.67           4
>
>The US is not the most violent country in the world.

On the other hand, this is just one measure of violence.  When I
see a table like this one, I don't say, "Hmm, nothing interesting
going on here."  Rather I'd wonder why the US is such an enormous
outlier.  Gun control advocates blame it on the availability of
guns, while those against disagree.  It's undeniable, though, that
something is going on here, and I'd be interested in seeing other
possible explanations.

Rob St. Amant
From: yodaiken@chelm.cs.umass.edu (victor yodaiken)
Newsgroups: ne.politics
Subject: Re: I'm in a gay mood!
Date: 31 Aug 92 12:25:40 GMT
Organization: University of Massachusetts, Amherst

>murph@buscard.fidonet.org (Brian Murphy) writes:
> > For me, a heterosexual man, seeing the way some of these homos carry on
> > is repulsive.  Earings in their ears, efeminate mannerisms, kissing
> > another man, walking arm in arm down the street...  you know, the
> > stereotype, wearing their homosexuality on their sleeves.

My advice: Get your own sexuality, and stop worrying so much about how
to keep other folks from offending you with theirs.


-- 


yodaiken@chelm.cs.umass.edu
From: gjc@mitech.com (George J. Carrette)
Newsgroups: ne.politics
Subject: Re: Hypocrasy test: Rights etc.
Date: 25 Aug 92 13:34:03 GMT
Distribution: ne
Organization: Mitech Corporation, Concord MA

In article <1992Aug22.165800.28164@spdcc.com>, rdonahue@spdcc.com (Bob Donahue) writes:
> If I die, no matter what my
> will says, my family can declare it invalid if it includes my
> lover because legally he has no relationship to me.

You better get a better laywer to help you build that will,
because it is quite common for people to give large sums of
money to people other than their family.

One technique is to not leave anybody obviously out of the will.
So your family cannot say that you "forgot them."
Make sure that everybody gets something of some value. Say $500. 

Furthermore, it is quite easy in law to enter into all sorts
of legal relationships with people, especially when it comes to 
the ownership of property.

As for myself, the first house I purchased in Cambridge was with
an unrelated male. 

-gjc
Newsgroups: ne.politics
From: murph@buscard.fidonet.org (Brian Murphy)
Newsgroups: ne.politics
Subject: Re: Bearing arms: our first line of defense
Date: 25 Aug 92 15:14:53 GMT
Reply-To: murph@buscard.fidonet.org (Brian Murphy)
Organization: The Business Card (BBS), Lawrence, MA - Data: 508-682-5329

drg@bubba.ma30.bull.com (Daniel R Guilderson) writes:

> In article <BZS.92Aug21223840@ussr.std.com> bzs@ussr.std.com (Barry Shein) wr
> 
>    From: murph@buscard.fidonet.org (Brian Murphy)
>    >When the Liberals start taking all our
>    >guns, you can be justified in fearing the government.
> 
>    And when you realize that it's not just your bogey-men, "the
>    liberals", perhaps you'll get somewhere on this issue.
> 
> George Bush being an excellent example.  What does Murph have to say?

About what?  You can have a gun and if Mr. Bush sends in his armies to do you
some dirt, you'll have the gun to shoot him square between the eyes.  Guns
protect the citizenry from an abusive government of whatever color.

                                      - - - Murph

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
   The Business Card (BBS), Lawrence, Massachusetts - Data: (508) 682-5329
   SysAdmin:  murph@buscard.fidonet.org / ...!ulowell!wizvax!buscard!murph
From: richb@kronos.com (Rich Braun)
Newsgroups: ne.politics
Subject: Re: I'm in a gay mood!
Date: 27 Aug 92 14:49:08 GMT
Organization: Kronos Inc. / Waltham, MA
Disclaimer: This posting is a personal opinion and not that of Kronos Inc.

murph@buscard.fidonet.org (Brian Murphy) writes:
>>>I like llamas.  My favorite newsgroups are alt.sex.gerbils.duct-tape and
>>>alt.sex.aluminum.baseball.bat.  I demand the same rights as the homos.

adam@endor.uucp (Adam Shostack) writes:
>>Please remember to create an alt.sex.gerbils.duct-tape.flame and
>>alt.sex.aluminum.baseball.bat.flame ...

rdonahue@spdcc.com (Bob Donahue) writes:
>	No, both of those groups already exist.

I don't think the ".flame" suffixes exist yet.  But just out of curiosity,
I decided to see just how fixated USENET people are with the topic of sex:

	% grep sex /usr/lib/news/active | sort
	alt.angst.xibo.sex 0000000000 0000000000 y
	alt.homosexual 0000000003 0000000000 y
	alt.politics.homosexuality 0000000202 0000000000 y
	alt.sex 0000001064 0000000000 y
	alt.sex.NOT 0000000000 0000000000 y
	alt.sex.aluminum.baseball.bat 0000000000 0000000000 y
	alt.sex.bestiality 0000000000 0000000000 y
	alt.sex.bestiality.hamster.duct-tape 0000000001 0000000000 y
	alt.sex.bondage 0000000079 0000000000 y
	alt.sex.bondage.ctl 0000000000 0000000000 y
	alt.sex.bondage.particle.physics 0000000001 0000000000 y
	alt.sex.boredom 0000000000 0000000000 y
	alt.sex.carasso 0000000000 0000000000 y
	alt.sex.carasso.snuggles 0000000000 0000000000 y
	alt.sex.graphics 0000000000 0000000000 y
	alt.sex.homosexual 0000000000 0000000000 y
	alt.sex.masterbation 0000000000 0000000000 y
	alt.sex.masturbation 0000000000 0000000000 y
	alt.sex.motss 0000000030 0000000000 y
	alt.sex.movies 0000000002 0000000000 y
	alt.sex.nudels.me.too 0000000000 0000000000 y
	alt.sex.pictures 0000000002 0000000000 y
	alt.sex.pictures.d 0000000004 0000000000 y
	alt.sex.pictures.female 0000000000 0000000000 y
	alt.sex.pictures.male 0000000000 0000000000 y
	alt.sex.sonja 0000000000 0000000000 y
	alt.sex.sounds 0000000000 0000000000 y
	alt.sex.stories 0000000004 0000000000 y
	alt.sex.wanted 0000000000 0000000000 y
	alt.sex.wanted.me-too 0000000000 0000000000 y
	alt.sex.wizards 0000000001 0000000000 y
	alt.sexual.abuse.recovery 0000000037 0000000000 y
	alt.sexy.bald.captains 0000000000 0000000000 y
	clari.news.law.crime.sex 0000000000 0000000000 y
	comp.sex 0000000000 0000000000 y
	de.talk.sex 0000000000 0000000000 y
	sub.sex 0000000000 0000000000 y

That's 37 newsgroups, something like 1.5% of the total.  (There are
three newsgroups containing the term "homosexual", and three others
containing "gay".  Interestingly, there are no matches for "hetero".)
I really have to wonder what they have to say in "comp.sex", though...

:-)

-rich
Xref: sparky ne.politics:2227 alt.politics.clinton:3842 alt.politics.bush:3881 talk.politics.misc:43351
From: rdonahue@spdcc.com (Bob Donahue)
Newsgroups: ne.politics,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush,talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: Efficiency
Date: 2 Sep 92 20:14:02 GMT
Organization: insert anything here

kml@cellar.org (John Galt) writes:
>borden@head-cfa.harvard.edu (Dave Borden) writes:

>> This country needs to pay more attention to efficiency.  Things could cost
>> a lot less if they could be made more efficient.  (I know this is obvious,
>> but I think it's worth discussing anyway.)  Here's one example:
>>[rest of saga deleted]

>Okay, so we make everyone more efficient.  then we need fewer workers.
>Then we have more unemployment, more entitlement costs.  Then we higher
>taxes, so corporations either layoff or become more efficient.  Eventually
>we will drive ourselves into the ground, if we haven't already.
>That's it!  It's the Industrial Revolution's fault!

	No, but your posting is a perfect example of the problems
in our education system....

	(In other words, which part of "duh!" goes over your head?)

	Greater efficiency means fewer workers for a specific task.
It also means less $$$ wasted which can be channeled into new
initiatives utilizing the workers no longer needed for the 
initial task.  This in turn provides more productivity (since
we're getting all these other things accomplished that we
didn't have before when we had hired you) and an overall 
increase in the status of life.

	Of course we could hire 1000's of inefficient people
whose main interest is "keep-my-cushy-job-at-all-costs" (presumably
the people you're most interested in saving) and we have the
cartoon "Dilbert".

BBC