HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: visser@convex.com (Lance Visser)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: national debt? why?
Date: 12 Jan 93 01:34:01 GMT
Distribution: talk
Organization: Engineering, CONVEX Computer Corp., Richardson, Tx., USA
X-Disclaimer: This message was written by a user at CONVEX Computer
              Corp. The opinions expressed are those of the user and
              not necessarily those of CONVEX.

In <1993Jan11.121613.16910@hemlock.cray.com> rja@mahogany126.cray.com (Russ Anderson) writes:


+>In article <1993Jan10.1778.29517@channel1>, "john lovett" <john.lovett@channel1.com> writes:
+>> This suggestion may be a little simplistic, but perhaps someone could
+>> flesh it out.
+>> 
+>> We have a large national debt, but since we owe it to ourselves, why not
+>> declare that we forgive ourselves the debt, and forget about it?

+>Gee, I'm and American, and my mortgage company is American (owned & run),
+>therefor we should forgive ourselves the morgage debt, and forget about it?

+>Somehow, I don't think the mortgage company would go along with this.

	Well, the way personal bankrupcy laws work these days, some people
have done just that.  A few unnamed central and south american countries
have relived themselves of debt burden by "restructuring" their debt
payment schedule which in reality meant a negotiated partial default.

	The government can certainly forgive the portion of the debt it
owes to itself.  But that would require blowing up the rest of the house
of cards and I dont think that there is the will to do it.

	I think that the government could pull a partial default, but
only if the deficit were zero simultainous with the default. No multi-year
plans.....because the government will not stick to them anyway.
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:66665 alt.current-events.somalia:790 alt.politics.bush:15689 alt.president.clinton:1406
From: ck442@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Floyd Low)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.current-events.somalia,alt.politics.bush,alt.president.clinton
Subject: Re: WAR IN BOSNIA!!!!
Date: 8 Jan 1993 07:34:06 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio (USA)
NNTP-Posting-Host: hela.ins.cwru.edu


re the bosnian humpty dumpty...it may fall and shatter into a million pieces which could be the next great wave of north american/european immigration, I note that Ellis Island has had an extensive face lift in the past 10 years. With ###


ect to Serb attrocities I expect that friendly Muslim countries to Western
interests and unfriendly ones (Iran) are going to demand the Bosnian
Muslims be given the chance as a minimum to defend themselves. At the
least the Serbs have created a modern day Armenia with 17000 dead and 50000
rape progeny....This is not going to end in our lifetimes. I hope thats
not too melodramatic
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.activism
From: gld@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Gary L Dare)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: Special Bonus Quiz
Date: 6 Jan 93 16:46:35 GMT
Reply-To: gld@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Gary L Dare)
Organization: The Bates Motel

egl1@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Elizabeth G. Levy) writes:
>ipser@solomon.technet.sg (Ed Ipser) writes:
>>nbh@netcom.com (N.B. Hedd) writes:
>>>Q: What is the difference between a Whig and a Republican?
>>>A: Time.

Zzzzz ....

>>Q: What is the difference between a Communist and a Democrat?
>>A: Native Language.
>
>[More fun Q & A deleted]
>
>Mr. Ipser, meanwhile, has responded through the time-honored and
>equally vacuous tradition of red-baiting.  Joy.

Seeing how some Americans get bent out of shape over the Democratic
party being the only "left" entity, I think some of them will go
into a coma when they see proceedings of the British or Canadian
Conservative Party conventions on CSPAN2 ...

gld
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Je me souviens ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Gary L. Dare
> gld@cunixd.cc.columbia.EDU 		President Bush should
> gld@cunixc.BITNET			pardon Amy Fisher NOW!
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: m23364@mwunix (James Meritt)
Subject: Re: Department of Energy
Organization: MITRE Corporation, McLean VA
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1993 13:51:18 GMT

In article <1993Jan7.215631.8428@Princeton.EDU> pswanson@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (Paul Swanson) writes:
}In article <1992Dec31.173515.18333@linus.mitre.org> m23364@mwunix (James Meritt) writes:
}>
}> [Lots of stuff about how unprepared Hazel O'Leary is to head DOE
}> deleted]

True or false?

}My turn for a pop quiz.  It may be somewhat more difficult than the
}original.
}
}1) 'Permanent Campaign' means what?

Don't know.  I would guess a perpetual state of advertising over production.

}2) Hazel O'Leary is Executive Vice President in charge of ????? at NSP.

Don't know off hand.

}3) The public relations performance of the DOE with regard to nuclear
}   waste cleanup has been:
}     a) mediocre
}     b) poor
}     c) bad
}     d) abysmal

Compared to what?  Better than the Soviet operations, less than Greenspeace would
like.

}4) NSP has decommisioned and/or disassembled how many nuclear reactors
}   since Ms. O'Leary has worked there?

Don't know off hand.


Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,ca.politics,ba.politics
From: phil@netcom.com (Phil Ronzone)
Subject: Re: Speaking ill
Keywords: Ronzone Illogic Typical
Organization: Generally in favor of, but mostly random.
Distribution: ca
Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1993 05:59:26 GMT

In article <1993Jan7.015705.29521@gordian.com> mike@gordian.com (Michael A. Thomas) writes:
    >>money & time to various groups affiliate with either party,
    >>but, is there an actual legitimate meaningful way to join
    >>either party?
    >>
    >Yes, dolt.

Oh, pray tell, please name it.


    >
    >>Like David Duke and his definite, swift, and strong
    >>denunciation by the Rupblican party when he "became" a
    >>Republican, I am unaware of any equivalent reaction by, if
    >>not the legions of homosexuals, at least the other homosexual
    >>organizations.
    >>
    >Blinders do that for you. --

So, like, you can't name anythimg to support your position.
-- 
I believe Gennifer Flowers.

These opinions are MINE, and you can't have 'em! (But I'll rent 'em cheap ...)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.activism
From: robc@wicat (Rob Carlson)
Subject: Re: "New Right" Libertarians?
Summary: Rockefeller  
Organization: Jostens Learning Corp
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 04:59:40 GMT

In article <1993Jan12.024806.9366@pony.Ingres.COM> garrett@Ingres.COM (WHEN ALL ELSE FAILS, READ THE INSTRUCTIONS) writes:
>From: garrett@Ingres.COM (WHEN ALL ELSE FAILS, READ THE INSTRUCTIONS)
>Subject: Re: "New Right" Libertarians?
>Summary: Rockefeller  
>Keywords: 
>Date: 12 Jan 93 02:48:06 GMT
>In article <robc.18.0@wicat>, robc@wicat (Rob Carlson)                                    writes...
>>In article <1993Jan11.065529.27080@s1.gov> lip@s1.gov (Loren I. Petrich) writes:
>>>From: lip@s1.gov (Loren I. Petrich)
>>>Subject: Re: "New Right" Libertarians?
>>>Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 06:55:29 GMT
>>>In article <robc.16.0@wicat> robc@wicat (Rob Carlson) writes:
>>>>In article <C0nIDp.oy@dscomsa.desy.de> hallam@zeus02.desy.de (Phill Hallam-Baker) writes:
>>>>	The only situation under which your scenario could be achieved is by 
>>>>force. Like some government making a law that says you may only work for 
>>>>that employer and cannot form any business of your own.
>>>
>>>	Or when other companies lock you out, for example.
>> 
>>	It will take force (i.e. government) for them to accomplish this.
>> 
>Or you could try Rockefeller's method. Which was to pay the railroad's
>to charge his competition much higher rates and drive them out of the
>business becuase they couldn't get their product to market.

	I don't know how true this is, but I have no reason to doubt you so 
I will assume it is true that he tried it. But this method will simply not 
work. Rockefeller would have to increase his operating costs higher than his 
competition. This would make him vulnerable in the long run. Products were 
moved to market long before railroads were invented and a number of 
alternative methods have been devised since the advent of the railroad.

	At the other end, their would be a great market for transportation 
services. It wouldn't be hard to undercut the current providers prices since 
they are artificially high. The railroad that is being subsidized would have 
the choice of being locked to one customer or lowering its prices to avoid 
giving the competition an advantage and its former customers.

Rob Carlson
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: rich@genie.slhs.udel.edu (Rich Schwartzman)
Subject: Re: "New Right" Libertarians?
Organization: Sometimes
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 20:44:47 GMT

In article <1iv4ugINNs59@transfer.stratus.com> jmann@vineland.pubs.stratus.com writes:
}In article <90228@ncratl.AtlantaGA.NCR.COM>  
}mwilson@ncratl.AtlantaGA.NCR.COM (Mark Wilson) writes:
}> In <1iuiriINNjie@transfer.stratus.com>  
}jmann@vineland.pubs.stratus.com (Jim Mann) writes:
}> |But some degree of regulation is needed here.  First off, the
}> |government must make sure that you don't have criminals running
}> |a taxi organization and mugging every third customer.
}> 
}> This is ludicrous.  If you knew that a given company was in the
}> habit of mugging it's customers, would you use that comapny.
}> I wouldn't.
}
}And how are you going to know this?  I consider licensing
}akin to consumer protection laws, which most of us support.
}(That is, since most of us support them, we have the right
}to collectively, via the governemnt, ask the government to
}check up on potential taxi drivers for us.)
}

Licensing is nothing more than an additional tax.  By law, I am required
to pay the state $75.00 a year for a license.  This license does not
protect me, my business name, or my clients from anything.  The only
consumer protection is the insurance and bonding I carry voluntarily.

}> 
}> |Second,
}> |the government provides some resources: most cities have taxi
}> |stand areas, where cabs can park but where cars cannot. For
}> |both these reasons, the government has to exercise some kind of
}> |control over cabs.
}> 
}> Another ludicrous argument.  Because the city provides a subsidy to
}> some taxi companies, the city has the right to control all taxi
}> companies.  Get rid of the taxi stands.  If some company like a  
}hotel
}> or an airport wants to provide stands as a service to their  
}customers,
}> then let them.  The city has no business providing such a service.
}> 
}
}And what about taxi stands in other areas of the city, where
}they are a service to the citizens as a whole.  The people
}(through the government) have decided they want this service,
}and want to take part of their city area for this service.
}
}--
}Jim Mann            
}Stratus Computer   jmann@vineland.pubs.stratus.com  

If there is a market (effective demand) for a taxi service, then the market
will pay for the service with no legitimate need for the government to
subsidize the service.  It is as ludicrous and fiscally irrisponsible for a
state or city government to subsidize a taxi company as it is for the
federal government to subsidize the tobacco industry.  And a business
dependent on governmnet subsidy for its existence has failed to meet market
demands.

-- 
   ---------------------------------------------
  | Richard B. Schwartzman, RBS Communications  |
  |  Media Coordinator, DE. Libertarian Party   |
  |         rich@genie.slhs.udel.edu            |
  |              (302) 455-0354                 |
   ---------------------------------------------

Newsgroups: alt.acvivism,talk.politics.misc
From: dave@alex.uchicago.edu (Dave Griffith)
Subject: Re: One Simple Question for the Libertarians...
Organization: University of Chicago
Distribution: na
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1993 22:26:56 GMT

In article <1993Jan4.201735.18614@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU> prs9k@brain.med.virginia.edu (Phil Scarr) writes:
>One simple question.  No embelishments, no rhetoric.  I just want a
>clear, concise answer to this question:
>
>Where does individualism come from (and as a corrolary, where do
>individuals come from)?
>

If there is any more obviously religious and unanswerable question, I've yet
to hear it.  You're likely to get any number of answers, none of them anywhere
near verifiable, and most of them retreads of various philosophical arguments
centuries old.   Why ask this question of libertarians in particular, by 
the way?  Surely one needn't believe in the primacy of the individual to have
opinions on where they came from.

If the above hasn't made it clear, calling this a "simple" question is
either foolish or dishonest.

-- 
Dave Griffith, Information Resources, University of Chicago,
Department of Surgery                       dave@alex.bsd.uchicago.edu
A man's best friend is his dogma.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: m23364@mwunix (James Meritt)
Subject: Re: erratum for fyi #161.
Organization: MITRE Corporation, McLean VA
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1992 15:40:09 GMT

In article <1992Dec30.222527.13044@relay.nswc.navy.mil> rsherme@chaos.nswc.navy.mil writes:
}TO:    FYI Readers
}FROM:  Audrey Leath
}DATE:  December 29, 1992
}
}Please note that the three labs listed in FYI #161 are only DOE's
}weapons labs.  The Department of Energy maintains other,
}non-weapons labs as well.
From: mikeq@freddy.CNA.TEK.COM (Mike Quigley)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: Perot's "United We Stand America" launched today
Date: 12 Jan 93 19:24:25 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Tektronix, Inc., Redmond,  OR.

In article <1993Jan12.175715.147@netcom.com> nagle@netcom.com (John Nagle) writes:
>lachman@netcom.com (Hans Lachman) writes:
>>Ross Perot launched "United We Stand America" today.  
>
>       So he's hiring "volunteers" again?
>
>					John Nagle

Nope, This time, you PAY HIM 15 BUCKS to be one of his VOLUNTEERS!
Visa, Mastercard, American Express accepted. Neat con! 

BTW, anyone catch him on the news this morning? Couldn't get his Oldsmobile
started. What's a guy like that doing driving a piece o' shit
Oldsmobile?

Mike
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.bush
From: mykes@shell.portal.com (mike myke schwartz)
Subject: Re: Democrat == Loony Left??? (was Re: Christiani
Followup-To: talk.politics.misc,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.bush
Organization: Portal Communications Company
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL7]
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 20:07:31 GMT

Dr. Norman J. LaFave (lafave@ial4.jsc.nasa.gov) wrote:
: You missed the point.
: 
: I am vehemently opposed to SDI as a total program. However, this one
: project,
: the Single-Stage-to-Orbit program, is an excellent technology  that just
: happens
: to be funded by SDI at present. This project is not spin-off producing,
: it is
: direct technology producing---it is capability producing. To say that no
: military projects ever produce spin-offs or commercial technology is just
: flat wrong. The military played a crucial role in microelectronic weight
: reduction
: and clock-speed increases as well as advances in control systems.
: 
: Norman
: 
: Dr. Norman J. LaFave
: Senior Engineer
: Lockheed Engineering and Sciences Company
: 
: 

My friend, you argue out of both sides of your mouth.  I said exactly
the same thing and you denied it.


: 
: 
: When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro
:                                Hunter Thompson
From: ed@wente.llnl.gov (Ed Suranyi)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: The New Education President
Date: 6 Jan 93 19:55:16 GMT
Organization: UC Davis Dept of Applied Science at LLNL

In article <1if0m5INN1dc@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu> ck347@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Richard A. Mulac) writes:
<had no minority members, will give us a breakdown of the student population
<at this elite private school.  And if it turns out to be 99% WASP, will they
<splash across the front pages of the New York Times and Washington Post that 
<Bill has chosen a rascist institution to educate his daughter?  I WOULDN'T
<COUNT ON IT!

I understand that this private school is famous for the diversity of its
student body, and for its scholarships to underprivileged students.

Ed
ed@wente.llnl.gov

Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,soc.motss
Subject: Re: What is Clay's real motivation?
From: sbrack@jupiter (Steve Brack)
Date: 10 Jan 93 01:25:11 EST
Reply-To: sbrack@jupiter.cse.utoledo.edu 
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL4


gsmith@polyhymnia.iwr.uni-heidelberg.de (Gene W. Smith) writes:
: In article <1993Jan6.173125.875@uoft02.utoledo.edu> sbrack@jupiter
: (Steve Brack) writes:
: 
: >	Hang on a second...  you just linked man/boy love to child 
: >	molestation using what has been called the "welfare argument."
: 
: I'm not convinced that NAMBLA is really about "man/boy love"
: (if this means adults with teenagers) and not child molestation.
: Roy Radow certainly seems unwilling to state this.

	Well, first of all, that's a very narrow definition of man/boy 
	love, and opinions still vary.  Personally, I believe it's a
	matter of individuals, not ages.

	When has Roy Radow been unwilling to say that NAMBLA is not about
	child molestation?  Just because people have an unrealistic set
	of criteria for child molestation (entirely age-based) doesn't
	mean that all forms of man/boy love or iintimacy are child 
	molestation.  Of course, there probably are child molesters in
	NAMBLA, but, then again, there are child molesters in every 
	organization you could think of. 

	Also, NAMBLA's focus is not only on the man/boy aspect, but also
	on the boy/man aspect of the relationship, and on boy/boy
	relationships. 

	What would convince you?  All I can give you is my personal feelings,
	as a NAMBLA member, and formerly a "boy" in a man/boy relationship.

--
Steven S. Brack        |"But the greatest of|   sbrack@jupiter.cse.utoledo.edu
2021 Roanwood Drive    | these is love."    |  STU0061@uoft01.BITNET 
Toledo, OH  43613-1605 \____________________/    brack@uoftcse.cse.utoledo.edu 
+1 419 GR4 1010        |  MY OWN  OPINIONS  |   sbrack@maine.cse.utoledo.edu
From: an030@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Broward Horne)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: national debt? why?
Date: 13 Jan 1993 02:11:58 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)
Reply-To: an030@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Broward Horne)
NNTP-Posting-Host: hela.ins.cwru.edu


In a previous article, visser@convex.com (Lance Visser) says:

>	Well, the way personal bankrupcy laws work these days, some people
>have done just that.  A few unnamed central and south american countries
>have relived themselves of debt burden by "restructuring" their debt
>payment schedule which in reality meant a negotiated partial default.


      A large part of S.A paying off debt is dependent on selling
      products to the U.S.  Any sort of trade war escalation, or a 
      continuing downturn, will probably result in total default.

      In all likelyhood, this would be enough to do some serious 
       banking damage in the U.S.   1993 might be as interesting
      as 1991 and 1990.

>
>	The government can certainly forgive the portion of the debt it
>owes to itself.  But that would require blowing up the rest of the house
>of cards and I dont think that there is the will to do it.
>
>	I think that the government could pull a partial default, but
>only if the deficit were zero simultainous with the default. No multi-year
>plans.....because the government will not stick to them anyway.
>
>
>
>
>
>
From: garry@alice.att.com (garry hodgson)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: The Spotlight
Date: 11 Jan 93 22:38:50 GMT
Reply-To: garry@alice.UUCP ()
Distribution: talk
Organization: AT&T, Bell Labs

Lance W. Bledsoe writes:

	Have you ever asked yourself any of these questions?:

	Why did we fight a war in Korea that was not declared, and we didn't
	want to win?

	[other interesting questions deleted]

	Lance

Interesting questions...So, what are the answers?
Will this be on the final?

Seriously, I know nothing about Spotlight, little or nothing
about JBS.  What are the above questions getting at?


-- 
Garry Hodgson			A slow winter day
AT&T Bell Labs			A night like forever
garry@alice.att.com		Sink like a stone
att!alice!garry			Float like a feather
From: mpolen@suntory.mti.sgi.com (Mike Polen)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: Bush really IS a wimp
Date: 8 Jan 93 00:50:29 GMT
Organization: Silicon Graphics, Inc.
NNTP-Posting-Host: suntory.mti.sgi.com

marc.colten) writes:
|> Mark Pundurs) writes:
|> > N.B. Hedd) writes:
|> > 
|> > >If Weinberger and
|> > >Bush are really innocent, then they have nothing to fear from a jury of
|> > >12 good men and women--the truth will out. Or is that what the little
|> > >sh*t was afraid of?
|> > 
|> > I think he wished to avoid (though not "afraid of") years and megabucks 
|> > wasted fighting a witchhunt, while the media and other leftists dragged 
|> > his name through the mud, with the best possible conclusion being "not
|> > proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt." I think he did the best thing 
|> > for himself, his fellow patriots --and the country.
|> > 
|> 
|> Please!  Turn it around and let a Democratic president decide,
|> for the judge, the jury and the country that a trial was a 
|> witchhunt and let the person go, and see the Republican's howl.
|> 
I am sure that Bush thought it was a witchhunt.  He was the person being
hunted.  Who would know better if he was a witch or not?

-- 
These opinions are usually my own, sometimes my dog's,
occasionaly my (grown) children's, never my employer's.
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:66251 alt.sex:40957
From: cramer@optilink.COM (Clayton Cramer)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.sex
Subject: Re: What is Clay's real motivation?
Date: 4 Jan 93 18:27:50 GMT
Organization: Optilink Corporation, Petaluma, CA

[soc.motss deleted because the poor dears can't handle reading
anything that disagrees with them.]

In article <1993Jan1.042836.16705@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU>, gsh7w@fermi.clas.Virginia.EDU (Greg Hennessy) writes:
> In article <13759@optilink.COM> walsh@optilink.COM (Mark Walsh) writes:
> #The parade committee
> #accepted NAMBLA as one of the groups marching in the parade,
> #a big mistake in my opinion.
> 
> Ah, respecting free speech is a big mistake.
> 
> -Greg Hennessy, University of Virginia

I guess Mr. Hennessy didn't hold the speeches by Pat Robertson and
Pat Buchanan at the Republican Convention against the Republican
Party.  Can we presume that Mr. Hennessy will welcome with open
arms members of the Klan to speak at the next Democratic National
Convention?  I mean, we have to respect free speech, right?

-- 
Clayton E. Cramer {uunet,pyramid}!optilink!cramer  My opinions, all mine!
C++ is to C, as lung cancer is to lung.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc