HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: cs911461@ariel.yorku.ca (CHRISTIAN D. ARMOUR)
Subject: Re: You're a racist! statements
Originator: cs911461@a01.ariel.yorku.ca
Organization: York University, Toronto, Canada
Distribution: york
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1992 17:22:38 GMT


In article <LABACH.92Oct9080936@acs5.acs.ucalgary.ca>, labach@acs.ucalgary.ca (Terence Michael Labach) writes:
>> 
>> In article <1992Oct8.003634.2999        In <1992Oct1.012930.10466            
>> @newshub.ariel.yorku.ca>		@newshub.ariel.yorku.ca>             
>> cs911461@ariel.yorku.ca (CHRISTIAN D.	cs911461@ariel.yorku.ca (CHRISTIAN D.
>> ARMOUR) writes:   			ARMOUR) writes:                      
>> 					                                     
>>  This is further proof that a white	Canada is "praised" as a             
>>  person cannot even mention the issue	multi-cultural "heaven on Earth" wher
>>  of race relations without being	everyone can live together           
>>  called a racist.			harmoniously regardless of their     
>> 					creed, religion or skin colour.  This
>> 					is total crap.  What it really means 
>> 					is that "whitey" is an evil fiend who
>> 					gets everything he has "real easy" an
>> 					never has to experience hardship in  
>> 					any form.  Furthermore, "whitey" must
>> 					pay special attention to everything  
>> 					that he says, does and thinks because
>> 					he is to blame for the world's       
>> 					problems.                            


And your point is.....??


C. Armour-Kidson
cs911461@ariel.yorku.ca
Xref: sparky alt.politics.democrats.d:192 alt.politics.bush:8511 talk.politics.misc:50691 alt.politics.clinton:9522
From: skinny@board8.uucp (skinny)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.democrats.d,alt.politics.bush,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.clinton
Subject: Re: Bush is a mother fucker
Date: 10 Oct 92 02:06:32 GMT
Organization: board8

cea1@Ra.MsState.Edu (Carolyn E. Adams-Price) writes:

>And....to all of you who think the problem with the US is
>business regulation, I say, I hope you drown in the pollution
>or are hurt by an end to safety standards that an end to business
>regulation would cause!!!!!

>Carolyn Adams-Price
>Department of Psychology
>Mississippi State University

 What about regulating pms? Take a couple of Midol, get some rest and
start looking for a job in the real world so you'll understand where
money comes from.

 thank you.
Newsgroups: alt.politics.democrats.d,soc.culture.canada
From: watanabe@milton.cs.uiuc.edu (Larry Watanabe)
Subject: Re: You're a racist! NET CHALLENGE!
Organization: University of Illinois, Dept. of Comp. Sci., Urbana, IL
Distribution: usa
Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1992 03:44:36 GMT

cs911461@ariel.yorku.ca (CHRISTIAN D. ARMOUR) writes:

>Ok Netland.  You judge.  Is the Mr. Labach's signature not a blatant
>"you're a racist!" remark?  Were not his 4 posts prior to this one
>not other examples of "you're a racist!" remarks?

>Ps. This time Netland, please post your replies.  If you haven't read the
>original "whitey" post, Mr. Labach has graciously supplied the article
>number in his signature.

He was posting information about opinions that you have
publicly expressed, and was letting us judge whether you were
a racist by your own freely expressed opinions.

Your opinions are similar to those expressed by
groups such as Aryan Nation. These groups also often
claim not to be racist, and again, it is difficult to prove
racism. To claim that someone is racist is to claim that
one can prove something about another's thought processes,
impossible for us non-telepaths.

-Larry Watanabe watanabe@cs.uiuc.edu
Xref: sparky alt.politics.democrats.d:169 alt.politics.bush:8080 talk.politics.misc:50139 alt.politics.clinton:8958
From: mjp@itd.dsto.gov.au
Newsgroups: alt.politics.democrats.d,alt.politics.bush,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.clinton
Subject: Re: socialism (was B isa MF)
Date: 8 Oct 92 16:12:58 GMT
 <1992Oct1.143112.21973@csi.jpl.nasa.gov> <BvHvLx.C5y@quake.sylmar.ca.us> <1992Oct7.155813.164737@dstos3.dsto.gov.au>


In my previous article I was working only from memory so
here are the real rates all in $A.

$Taxable income			TAX
1-5400				Nil
5401-20 700		Nil + 20c for each $ over 5400
20 701-36 000		3060 +38c for each $ over 20 700
36 001-50 000		8874 + 46c for each $ over 36 000
50001 and over		15 314 + 47c fore each $ 0ver 50000

The figures such as 38c fore each dollar over are the
marginal tax rat, i.e. in this case the marginal rate is
38%.

On top of the above, people earning more than 12 500~ pay
1.25% medicare levy on all their income.

So the true tax rates are

Income			Average tax Rate
1			0%
5400			0%
12 000			11%
20 700      		16.25%
36 000			26.25%   This is the average Australian wage
50 000			32.25%
75 000			37.25%
100 000			40.45%

From there it rises asymtopically approaching 48.25%

However you must remember that these figures all go on
taxable income, and there are many deductions to reduce
that. Eg all cost of employment except transport and clothes
(unless they are uniforms or safety equipment). All costs
of education.

Also under the dividend imputation scheme, most dividends
on shares is tax free.
The company tax rate is 39% and as well as a divedend check
you get a statement of how much tax the company paid pro
rata in terms of your shares. That tax is considered to be
tax you have already paid, so you only pay the difference
between the company tax rate and your marginal rate, hence
most people get a tax refund from their share dividends.

Michael
--
Michael Pilling				Phone: +61 8 259 7017
Software Engineering Group		Fax: +61 8 259 5980
Information Technology Division		Telex: AA82799
DSTO Australia				michael_pilling@itd.dsto.gov.au
Newsgroups: alt.politics.democrats.d,soc.culture.canada
From: cs911461@ariel.yorku.ca (CHRISTIAN D. ARMOUR)
Subject: Re: NET CHALLENGE
Organization: York University, Toronto, Canada
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1992 05:35:25 GMT

In article <LABACH.92Oct15133937@acs5.acs.ucalgary.ca> labach@acs.ucalgary.ca (Terence Michael Labach)'s signature reads: 

>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>"I wish I had the opposite sex drooling at my image!"
>C. Armour-Kidson, cs911461@ariel.yorku.ca, in alt.supermodels
>
> Thanks to the e-correspondent who sent me this gem!  If you have your own
> favourite C. Armour-Kidson quotation, please feel free to send it to me.


What I say in jest in alt.supermodels (a nice light-hearted group for
topical nonsense) belongs in alt.supermodels.  

I should actually copyright my work so I can sue you when your 
Government-of-Canada-programmed mind runs out of intelligent and on-
subject things to say.  

Go to comp.lang.c++ next and get a few of my hilarious quotes about
enums!  Try comp.os.linux; you'll get more "gems" there!  And of
course, alt.nick.sucks is replete with my French faux-pas.  That is
if you have the guts to know French.

Again, your cowardice is showing.  Post a detailed summary of your
own position on multiculturalism and what part the white anglo-saxon
should assume in it before you begin pointing that Government-of-
Canada-programmed finger.  Try posting it in French too.

Hugs and Kisses,


C. Armour-Kidson
cs911461@ariel.yorku.ca

Newsgroups: alt.politics.democrats.d,soc.culture.canada
From: labach@acs.ucalgary.ca (Terence Michael Labach)
Subject: Re: NET CHALLENGE
Originator: labach@acs5.acs.ucalgary.ca
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1992 15:15:33 GMT
	<LABACH.92Oct15133937@acs5.acs.ucalgary.ca>
	<1992Oct16.053525.29747@newshub.ariel.yorku.ca>
Organization: The Bobby Jurasin Fan Club

In article <1992Oct16.053525.29747@newshub.ariel.yorku.ca>
cs911461@ariel.yorku.ca (CHRISTIAN D. ARMOUR) writes: 
> Go to comp.lang.c++ next and get a few of my hilarious quotes about
> enums!  Try comp.os.linux; you'll get more "gems" there!  And of
> course, alt.nick.sucks is replete with my French faux-pas.  That is
> if you have the guts to know French.
  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Knowing French is a test of courage?  Good thing G. Gordon Liddy didn't
know that...

- terry -
----------------------------------------------------------------------
"I belong to no organized political party.  I am a Democrat."
 - Will Rogers
Newsgroups: alt.politics.democrats.d,alt.politics.bush,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.clinton
From: sieferme@stein.u.washington.edu (Eric Sieferman)
Subject: Re: Rush is...
Organization: University of Washington, Seattle
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1992 20:25:57 GMT

In article <BvzoE9.397@quake.sylmar.ca.us> brian@quake.sylmar.ca.us (Brian K. Yoder) writes:
>In article <1992Oct8.175409.18425@u.washington.edu> sieferme@milton.u.washington.edu (Eric Sieferman) writes:
>
>>There are a lot of people posting to this group who DO heckle
>>Democrats (eg., calling them "socialists").  
>
>Some people believe in calling a spade a spade.  The Democrats advocate 
>state control as the solution to every problem in society, the redistribution
>of wealth, and no limits (except perhaps on speech and press when it suits
>them) on the power of government to meddle in private affairs.

I've read the Democratic Party's platform, and it advocates none 
of these things.  If you think that there is some sort of
unspoken agenda on the part of the Democrats, please
let us know.

>Of course,
>in certain cases like they happen to take a position which doesn't involve
>government force, but I can't think of an issue for which the basis of that
>positon is taken because they don't think that the proper powers of the 
>government extend there.  
>
>If the democrats are not socialists, what are they?  They do bear some
>resemblance to fascists (as do the republicans), but "socialism" is 
>probably the most appropriate description of the democratic philosophy.

The platform of the Democratic Party is closer to "socialism"
as seen in many European countries than is the Republican Party
platform, but that is not saying much.  The range of political
ideas and debate in the US is about this wide:

                       |-----------|

whereas in most other industrial democracies the range is more like:

         |--------------------------------|

For an example of a nearby party whose policies are more like what
the rest of the world regards as "socialist", look at
the New Democratic Party in Canada.  And, PLEASE, don't flame
me for "defending" socialism, which I am not.

>You might not like that epithet, but that doesn't make it an empty insult.
>
>--Brian

I don't like it because it IS empty.


-- 
| Eric Sieferman            |    sieferme@u.washington.edu          |
| U. of W., M.C.I.S.        |    (206) 685-3104                     |

Newsgroups: alt.politics.democrats.d
From: cs911461@ariel.yorku.ca (CHRISTIAN D. ARMOUR)
Subject: Re: You're a racist! statements
Originator: cs911461@t05.ariel.yorku.ca
Organization: York University, Toronto, Canada
Distribution: york
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 22:54:31 GMT


In article <LABACH.92Oct7124518@acs5.acs.ucalgary.ca>, labach@acs.ucalgary.ca (Terence Michael Labach) writes:

>> No, I do not think that undergraduates are garbage.  I think that
>> undergraduates often have insufficient life experience to recognize when
>> they are relating fantasy as fact.  Everything you have written about
>> the hardships that white Canadians must face is a complete fabrication.
>> Were you older and wiser in the ways of the world, you might have a
>> better perspective on what hardship is.
	
	If only you knew... obviously you suffer from the delusion 
	that you can intuit a person's life experiences and intelligence
	level over the Usenet lines.  Poor fool, you suffer from
	Canadian disease.

>> What got you going about "whitey" and non-whites.  Scared by a viewing
>> of "My Beautiful Launderette"?  Listened to too many Rush albums?

	Sorry, I've never listened to Rush.  My thoughts and observations
	are my own; I detest plagiarism.

>> I don't think WASPs are garbage either.  I think they're a minority
>> among many others.  But I judge people on their own merits, not on
>> whether they are white, anglo-saxon, or protestant.  (nor black,
>> catholic, or any other racial, religious, or ethnic criterion one might
>> name).

	I believe I'm on public record for saying the same thing.  I'm
	just one step ahead of you, aren't I?
 
>> Don't ascribe to me your delusion of assuming racial groups are
>> homogeneous blocks of dullards who blindly follow some pre-ordained plan
>> to conquer the world.

	Blindly follow?  Some.  Conquer the world?  Probably very few.
	There are countless xenophobic groups in Canada which absolutely
	refuse to "blend in".  I hate that.  Do they think they're 
	better than the rest of us or are they so insecure that we're
	very scary to them.  Either way, a judgement as to worth is
	being made.


C. Armour-Kidson
cs911461@ariel.yorku.ca
Xref: sparky alt.politics.democrats.d:199 soc.culture.canada:7360
From: godfrey@sscvx1.ssc.gov (LAURENCE GODFREY)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.democrats.d,soc.culture.canada
Subject: Re: You're a racist! NET CHALLENGE!
Date: 11 Oct 92 00:28:00 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Superconducting Super Collider Laboratory
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.4-b1

In article <1992Oct10.182736.10254@newshub.ariel.yorku.ca>, cs911461@ariel.yorku.ca (CHRISTIAN D. ARM writes...

Even though you're posting from Canada and your responses suggest that
you're far too far to the right for my liking (Canada's form of socialism
is far too wishy-washy for my liking, and not nearly socialist enough),
I feel compelled to side with you over the unreasonable accusation of
racism.  I too am frequently accused on the net of being racist, in fact
whenever I make any criticism of the Thais, Singaporeans, Filipinos etc.  It
seems to be impossible to criticise any feature of these countries without
being accused of racism, even though I wrote of such things as Thais
attitudes to foreigners, robberies in the Philippines, democracy and
freedom of the individual in Singapore etc.  This offends me just as it
does you, because it prevents people from properly discussing issues
in other countries unless they happen to a) have ssomething nice to say
or b) are a national of that country.  It also offends me because I
have been a victim of real racism - as a jew in England (lapsed of course),
as a jew in canada, as the husband of a Filipina, as a jew in Germany, and
my wife has been the victim of same in Germany and England.  Finally
it offends me because I have fought against real racism all my life.

Let me illustrate my point.  I can say "most jews have big noses" (as
a jew I am allowed to use this as an example) and no-one should be able
to accuse me of racism, because this comment is perfectly true.  But
they will.  I can say "I think most jews are too interested in money" - 
again this is simply a statement of my opinion, I believe it to be true,
I do not think it is racist.  If I were to say "I hate jews, and I think
they should all be sent to Bangkok" that would be racist.  I really think
that part of the problem is the word "racist" itself - if it means 
making a statement about national characterics or racial characterics
then I frankly can see nothing wrong with it - for example, I can
legitimately say "all blacks have dark skin" and if that is racist then
there is nothing wrong with racism, I could say "all Chinese have
slanted eyes" etc. too.  The kind of racist statement that is clearly
wrong is one which embodies an unreasonable prejudice.  I don't think
I make such statements, except against Canadians and Germans on the net,
and that is only to provoke them!

Laurence
Newsgroups: alt.politics.democrats.d,alt.politics.bush,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.clinton
From: thood@corvus.matrox.com (Thomas Hood)
Subject: Re: You're a racist! NET CHALLENGE!
Organization: Matrox Ltd.
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 92 18:40:31 GMT

godfrey@sscvx1.ssc.gov (LAURENCE GODFREY) writes:

>In article <1992Oct10.182736.10254@newshub.ariel.yorku.ca>, cs911461@ariel.yorku.ca (CHRISTIAN D. ARM writes...

>Let me illustrate my point.  I can say "most jews have big noses" (as
>a jew I am allowed to use this as an example) and no-one should be able
>to accuse me of racism, because this comment is perfectly true.  But
>they will.  I can say "I think most jews are too interested in money" - 
>again this is simply a statement of my opinion, I believe it to be true,
>I do not think it is racist.
>Laurence

Strictly speaking, such statements are not racist.  However, they often
indicate that the speaker has bigoted attitudes.  Saying "Jews have big
noses" is appropriate in a dissertation on nasal mass, but inappropriate
in most other circumstances.  A bigot tends to say such things when
they are not called for.

People are extremely sensitive to racial slurs, so one must be very careful.

--
Thomas Hood                                                    thood@matrox.com
Xref: sparky alt.politics.democrats.d:225 soc.culture.canada:7569
From: lyman@casbah.acns.nwu.edu (Kenneth Casey)
Subject: Re: Bush is a mother fucker
Organization: Northwestern University, Evanston Illinois.
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1992 23:28:10 GMT

In article <1992Oct7.143931.7449@ra.msstate.edu> cea1@Ra.MsState.Edu (Carolyn E. Adams-Price) writes:
>John Moore of Scottsdale, Arizona writes that he is not against all
>federal regulations, but .....
>
>Perhaps you should die because the FDA doesn't approve a medication needed
>for your treatment.
>Perhaps you should lose your job because of unnecessary environmental standards.
>Perhaps you should starve because the minimum wage is raised too much by 
>a Democratic congress.
>
>I am glad that Moore recognizes that not all regulations are unnecessary.
>Some people seem to believe that they are.  I am merely suspicious of
>business groups who are on the warpath to elminate regulations that
>they think harm them.  For example, logging groups who want the right
>to log giant redwoods as they see fit.  Whose interests are they looking
>out for?  
>
>I am also concerned about groups that would keep the minimum wage
>unreasonably low.  How long was it at around $3.00/hour?  
>When the minimum wage is that low, there is no motivation to
>get off welfare.  The minimum wage needs to be marginally livable.
>
>This country has a lot of problems, but business and industry have
>done a pretty good job on their own in lobbying congress to 
>eliminate unnecessary regulations.  I simply object to
>people who think that regulations are the big problem in this country,
>(and that seems to be the only problem Bush can see), instead of
>education, poverty, health care, crime, justice, etc.
>
>Carolyn Adams-Price
>Department of Psychology 
>Mississippi State University
>


	The question isn't whether to regulate. It's how to regulate
	effectively. Effectively means not hamstringing businesses
	while protecting our environment, citizens and cities.
	If we don't regulate,it will come back to haunt us all.
	Even the fat guys in the boardrooms. Arguing that we don't
	need or can't afford to regulate our businesses is like
	arguing that you don't need to fill the gas tank of your
	Rolls cause it's expensive and the weight will slow you
Newsgroups: alt.politics.democrats.d,alt.politics.bush,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.clinton
From: brian@quake.sylmar.ca.us (Brian K. Yoder)
Subject: Re: Bush is a mother fucker
Organization: Quake Public Access
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1992 01:54:54 GMT

In article <1992Oct5.191244.19614@ra.msstate.edu> cea1@Ra.MsState.Edu (Carolyn E. Adams-Price) writes:
>And....to all of you who think the problem with the US is
>business regulation, I say, I hope you drown in the pollution
>or are hurt by an end to safety standards that an end to business
>regulation would cause!!!!!

You obviously know nothing about business, nad I wish people like you who
want to tell people like me how to run MY business would keep your bloody
nose out of my business.  As for as I have seen in the chemical, automotive,
and computer industries, government regulations do little if anything to
prevent pollution and improve safety, and often make these these things 
worse.  What they do accomplish is to make everything a business wants to
do much more difficult.  Think aobut it.  If you wanted to start a small 
manufacturing business based on your personal savings, how many THOUSANDS
of hours of time is nedessary to abide by (and even understand) all of the
relevant government regulations?  

If my business results in some harm to someone, go ahead and sue the hell out
of me, but don't tell me how to run my business until then.  Perhaps you 
think that this should be applied to individual people too?  Have you
ever heard of the concept of innocent until proven guilty?  

I don't really care whether you hate businessmen and think they all want to
poison everyone.  My respect for the source of such hatred is so low that
it doesn't matter much to me.  What matters is when people like you have the
government force people like me to abide by your oh-so-enlightened views
on how businesses ought to be run.  Who the hell do you think you are
anyway?  My boss?

If you don't think that government regulations don't impose a terrible cost 
on businesses, you obviously know nothing about running a business, and ought
to keep your nose out of the business of those who do.

--Brian


Newsgroups: alt.politics.democrats.d,alt.politics.bush,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.clinton