HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: mike
Subject: Re: YAQOTD
Organization: Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1992 18:13:29 GMT

In article <1992Oct2.014535.7901@usl.edu>, cs261160@ucs.usl.edu (Zamora Rodrigo) writes:
|> In article <BvCJBJ.7GJ@mentor.cc.purdue.edu> jester@sage.cc.purdue.edu (Jester) writes:
|> >0.5% of the U.S. population owns 48.4% of the assets. 1% owns 61.8% and 10%
|> >owns 91.7%. -- Source: Arthur B. Kennickell,_ Demographics & Household Savings_
couple of lines deleted
|> not an expert, but then again who is)  However I do know that one of the major
|> goals of economics is to provide an equitable distribution of income and here
   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^                            ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|> capitalism fails badly.  Of course, the pure capitalists will argue this point, but if any of you know of a capitalist system that does not have this condition
|> please educate me.

|> Rodrigo Zamora  
Capitalism : a system where ownership of resources is private and the decision
prosess is decentralized (decisions depend on a market system)

Political choice is what decides the distribution of income while the major goal 
(if not the only) of economics is efficiency in production and consumption 
(micro level) and stability (macro level).
in "welfare economics" the fundamental theorems basically say 1)every competitive 
equilibrium is Pareto optimal and 2) every Pareto optimal allocation of resources 
can be achieved as a competitive equilibrium given some initial allocation of 
resources . Unfortunately Pareto optimality is not a very useful goal all by 
itself as we actually have to CARE about the welfare of all participants.

As i see it it is not capitalism that has failed when we observe distributions as 
the one above but the politicians. They are the ones who set the "goals" and if
equitable income distribution is not one of them then no economical system in the
world can/will provide it for you (just think of ex-USSR ...) 

if the 90% are not content with the 10% of assets they can do something namely
vote the politicians that won't do what they want out of office . if they reelct
the same ones as before that can only mean that 1) actually the 10% of assets were
enough for at least most of the 90% to live of OR 2) they don't deserve better

not an expert either
Newsgroups: alt.overlords
From: jester@sage.cc.purdue.edu (Jester)
Subject: YAQOTD
Organization: Purdue University Computing Center
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1992 14:07:18 GMT

'Ministry is the perfect music to
lock Tipper Gore in a padded cell with'
	--Request magazine
-- 
I am the paper-cut that ruins your morning. . .
I am the ingrown nail on the foot of crime
I am the squashed bug on your flying saucer widshield.
I am the moth that seeks your porch light.
Newsgroups: alt.overlords
Subject: <None>
From: ngsippel@miavx2.ham.muohio.edu
Date: 29 Sep 92 18:40:43 EDT
Organization: Watch Ren And Stimpy or Else!

Hello,


I would like to keep my membership to overlords.

I've been really busy and I mostly read alt.tv.ren-n-stimpy unless I have time
to read other things (like now, for example).

I have a good contraversy.  Was is fair of Nick to fire John K.?

And should a 12 year old kid be allowed to divorce his parents?  

(Actually, that's two topics ;)

-- 
      .    _  .     _____________ 
      |\_|/__/|    /             \ 
     / / \/ \  \  / Happy! Happy! \      
    /__|O||O|__ \ \   Joy! Joy!   / 
   |/_ \_/\_/ _\ | \  ___________/      
   | | (____) | ||  |/                       
   \/\___/\__/  // _/
   (_/         ||   
    |          ||\   Norman Sippel
     \        //_/   alias Norman "Muddy" Stimpy
      \______//      
     __|| __||       Email: ngsippel@miavx2.ham.muohio.edu
    (____(____)             ngsippel@komodo.ham.muohio.edu
          
Newsgroups: alt.overlords
From: erwinaw@NeXTwork.Rose-Hulman.Edu (Anthony W. Erwin)
Subject: PEROOOOOOT!
Organization: Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1992 23:19:44 GMT


	Go Ross Perot!  Clinton and Bush just don't cut it.  Let's get somebody  
with good business sense who actually cares about the American people.  
	Bush has proven over the last four years that he's nothing.  What in  
the hell has he done and what are his plans?  Someone told me that in an  
interview, Bush was asked what his plans are for the next for years.  He  
replied, "I'll handle whatever comes up."  Some vision.  I cannot come up with  
very much positive out of the Bush years.  Regardless, I still think I would  
vote for Bush over Clinton.  
	Clinton would probably have the country in the shape it was in when  
Carter left.  All we need is to send the liberal democratic congress on a tax,  
spend, and over-regulation spree.
	Speaking of Congress, I agree with the Republican convention rally cry,  
"CLEAN THE HOUSE!"  The men on Capital Hill just suck.
	Let's elect Perot and get a strong third party started.

				Sincerely,
				Tony Erwin, Mr. Guy Who's an 
						Unstoppable Juggernaut

erwinaw@nextwork.rose-hulman.edu
From: jester@sage.cc.purdue.edu (Jester)
Newsgroups: alt.overlords
Subject: YAQOTD
Date: 5 Oct 92 13:52:39 GMT
Organization: Purdue University Computing Center


	When by judgement one means knowing how something comes to be
	what it is, the judgement must appear as re-constructing the
	identical universe of the difference.  Then every model
	includes the measure of its own difference.  No state of
	equilibrium is empowered to remain identical, or to compel the
	individual to alter (and integrate with it).  The identical is
	equal to itself, since it is different.

					--Franco Spisani (1975)
-- 
I am the chill that runs down your spine.
I am the surprise in your cereal box.
I am the hair on the lens of your projector.
I am the metal key on the sardine can of justice.
From: v070p6nd@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu (Anthos)
Newsgroups: alt.overlords
Subject: Re: God???? or just a bit of blind luck?
Summary: There are more books post-middle ages then there were before.
Date: 27 Sep 92 20:36:00 GMT
Organization: SUNY at Beefalo
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

In article <1992Sep27.134533.1802@gacvx2.gac.edu>, csteffen@dion.gac.edu (Craig P Steffen) writes...
>In article <Bv5MBz.Mxo@mentor.cc.purdue.edu>  writes:
>> well, i for one believe that 90% of the bible is hogwash...
> 
>I believe that you believe.
> 
>> i know for a fact the the book or revelations is totally fake
> 
>You KNOW!?!   For a FACT!?!  You sound pretty darn sure for someone who  
>wasn't there.  I accept that you believe that, even that you would defend  
>that opinion, but don't delude yourself into thinking that you "know for a  
>fact".  
> 
>> it was just a tool of the church written to scare people
>> back to christianity during the middle ages when the church
>> beacem scared that its power was being unsurped by local
>> feudal lords.
There is an investigation going on right now as to why there are more books
in the New Testament after the middle ages than before.  Revelations is the only
book that completely appears after the middle ages.  Most of the other books 
that are under scrutiny (Which are most of them) just have verses, and even 
chapters, added.  This investigation was sparked by the discovery of a set of
Holy Bibles which were missing KEY verses which delineated the actions of 
the church at that time, and others that were seemingly altered during the
middle ages.  In fact, according to this study, as of Dec. 1987,"...Revelations 
would probably be the purest example of middle ages addition..." to the Bible.



Don't ask me for where I found it, as I was in my local library and a friend
of mine pointed it out to me.  The quote stuck in my mind.  I did though see
a copy of a pre-middle ages Bible, and it is quite a bit THINNER than what you
have now.


>Again, I would be willing to debate this, as long as we can keep hard  
>facts from opinion.  
Here's some facts, use them as you wish.


BTW, the study has officially been put on hold by the CATHOLIC CHURCH, since
they will not release any pre middle age Bible in their possession to the
study.  Curious?
>> 
>> 
>> Jester
>> SOGDAC
>> -- 
>> I am the cold sore that stings your lip!
>> I am the parking meter that expires while you shop!
>> I am the soapscum that clings to your tub.
>> I am the hairball that sticks in your pipes.
> 
>Craig Steffen
>Wielder of the Grand Unified Field Theory

Anthos, the Grey Knight, High Preist of Minikar, God of Chaos, Horrible Puns,
                                                  and Extremely Bad Form
================================================================================
Across time and space/ The grey knight cometh/ With dragons to rape/
Madiens to slay/ Castles to sack/ Towns to pillage/ Quarterbacks to plunder

Oh, how I am confused!
===========I wish this was a .sig so I wouldn't have to type all this===========
From: 2y16mulsoffr@vms.csd.mu.edu
Newsgroups: alt.overlords
Subject: WELL WELL WELL
Date: 6 Oct 1992 20:21:35 GMT
Organization: Marquette University - Computer Services
Reply-To: 2y16mulsoffr@vms.csd.mu.edu
NNTP-Posting-Host: vmsb.csd.mu.edu


NO ONE EVER SAID TROLLS COULD TYPE
Organization: Sophomore, Mechanical Engineering, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA
Newsgroups: alt.overlords
Date: Tue,  6 Oct 1992 19:15:36 -0400 
From: Mark Beirne Lively <ml5a+@andrew.cmu.edu>
Subject: Re: <None> 

>.>I can't imagine a "perfect child" developing in a family which is so
>.>whacked that they kid divorces its parents, but I spose if that is the
>.>sort of child that Mr. Rich Guy wants...
>
>.>We'll probably here about [whatzisname] taking out a K-Mart in a few
>.>years, but hopefully not.  (if he's 12 then most of the damage is
>.>already done)
>
>.	What I was atlaking about was a rich couple finds an adorable 5 yerar
>.old or such and convinces him through sufficient bribes to divorce his
>.parents.  Iw as stating that as a worst case possibility.  I agree with
>.you though that the kids in the present case is pretty much screwed up
>.for life.
>
>Valid point, but I would think (i.e. hope) that such actions would
>probably be noticed by the biological parents, and that the resulting
>lawsuit might create sufficient difficulties that the divorce would
>not go through.  Also, 5 year olds tend to be *very* attached to their
>parents, unless there is something wrong quite with their family, in
>which case they are probably a mite screwed up.  
>
>--  Daniel Johnson  djohnson@cayenne.gac.edu  --
>    Grandiose Pontiff of Misplaced Hostility
Note this was part of a conversation over e-mail that origanally came
from here and is being sent back at the other participants suggestions. 
So what do you guys think about the above.

Friend of the one who is.
Bear aka the Lord High Rulebender aka (ML5A@ANDREW.CMU.EDU)
Newsgroups: alt.overlords
From: cs261160@ucs.usl.edu (Zamora Rodrigo)
Subject: Re: YAQOTD
Organization: Univ. of Southwestern La., Lafayette
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1992 01:45:35 GMT

In article <BvCJBJ.7GJ@mentor.cc.purdue.edu> jester@sage.cc.purdue.edu (Jester) writes:
>0.5% of the U.S. population owns 48.4% of the assets. 1% owns 61.8% and 10%
>owns 91.7%. -- Source: Arthur B. Kennickell,_ Demographics & Household Savings_

	This is IMHO one of the great flaws of capitalism.  I don't know of a
single capitalistic economy that does not have this condition. (Of course I am
not an expert, but then again who is)  However I do know that one of the major
goals of economics is to provide an equitable distribution of income and here
capitalism fails badly.  Of course, the pure capitalists will argue this point, but if any of you know of a capitalist system that does not have this condition
please educate me.


		NO MORE BUSH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Rodrigo Zamora                                        zam@usl.edu
   
-- 
Rodrigo Zamora  
zam@usl.edu
"Only an absolutely pretentious idiot would quote himself."
					-Rodrigo Zamora PPPP
Newsgroups: alt.overlords
From: jester@sage.cc.purdue.edu (Jester)
Subject: YAQOTD
Organization: Purdue University Computing Center
Date: Sat, 26 Sep 1992 16:27:36 GMT

"Faith is a fine invention
 When Gentlemen can *see* --
 But *Microscopes* are prudent
 In an Emergency."
         --Emily Dickinson
-- 
I am the single career man all women want to date!
I am the icky bug that crawls up your trouser leg.
I am the pin that bursts your bubble.
I am the butter that melts in your pan!
Newsgroups: alt.overlords
From: jester@sage.cc.purdue.edu (Jester)
Subject: YAQOTD
Organization: Purdue University Computing Center
Date: Sun, 4 Oct 1992 16:17:39 GMT

Women comprise fifty percent of the world's population, perform two-thirds
of the work, earn one-tenth of the world's income and own one percent of
the property."
                             ---  _The Beauty Myth_ by Naomi Wolf
-- 
I am the chill that runs down your spine.
I am the surprise in your cereal box.
I am the hair on the lens of your projector.
I am the metal key on the sardine can of justice.
Xref: sparky alt.abortion.inequity:4154 talk.abortion:39592 alt.usage.english:7606
From: beaver@castor.cs.psu.edu (Don Beaver)
Newsgroups: alt.abortion.inequity,talk.abortion,alt.usage.english
Subject: Re: Radical Reading Notions....
Date: 30 Sep 92 19:15:42 GMT

In article <1992Sep30.175355.23854@wetware.com> drieux@wetware.com (drieux, just drieux) writes:
>beaver@castor.cs.psu.edu (Don Beaver) writes:
>] In article <1a80teINN4r5@fido.asd.sgi.com> cj@sgi.com (C J Silverio) writes:
>] >beaver@castor.cs.psu.edu (Don Beaver) writes:
>] >|In article <1992Sep27.142543.22029@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu> kcochran@nyx.cs.du.edu (Keith "Justified And Ancient" Cochran) writes:
>] >|>Gee, and why would the women "refuse to speak honestly and openly"?  Maybe
>] >|>becuase they've already heard about how if they "show disrespect", they'll
>] >|>be killed?
>] >
>] >|Again, the only proposal to kill a woman simply because she 
>] >|"shows disrespect" has come from you.  Is that why you are so 
>] >|afraid of informing men about things that might upset them?
>] >
>] >You are incorrect.  Will Steeves posted here that he would
>] >probably kill a woman for being disrespectful:
>] >
>] >Message-ID: <1992Sep3.025255.4014@zooid.guild.org>
>] >[]And with God or Allah (whomever) as my witness, I will say
>] >[]that in my own situation, if the woman had *not* been so
>] >[]respecting as to tell me before, but in fact had not only told
>
>not the construct ' not been so respecting' - it is a 
>little more 'intellectually complex' in its formalization,
>but clearly would be mappable to 'disrespect' - unless the
>NeoLogismMachine is Loose...
>
>] >[]me right afterwards, but had waited a year (!) or more, I
>] >[]probably would have snapped right there and killed her where she
>] >[]stood.
>] 
>] You are incorrect.  The posting does not refer to killing a woman
>] because she was disrespectful, although you would like to believe so.
>] Read it.  Read it again.  
>
>For those NEW to english, to NOT RESPECT is generally
>what is denoted by 'disrespect' it is a construct of
>the inglich language that we negate a notion with 'dis'
>and hence the slang phraseology 'to dis someone'.

Let me say:

  "With whomever as my witness,
   if you had *not* been so skilled as to be able to type,
   but in fact could not speak English at all, 
   then I probably would have ignored you."

In your version of English, to which I am VERY NEW, that means that:

   if you don't speak English and I ignore you,
   then I am ignoring you simply because you can't type.

Hmm.  Does Berlitz offer a course?


>But I guess that when its important enought to legislate
>against the rights of the Born in favor of some of the UnBorn,
>{as they are still DeHumanizing Sperms and Eggs - since they
>seem not to have 'enough' potential....} it does not surprise
>me that a little 'disrespect' can be overlooked when it comes
>to killing women who fail to show the proper respect.....

You have some very odd theories.  Where do you get them from?

Don
-- 
beaver@cs.psu.edu                       Opinions from the PC-challenged
Newsgroups: alt.abortion.inequity
From: knapp@spot.Colorado.EDU (David Knapp)
Subject: Re: liberal media
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1992 04:01:05 GMT

In article <1992Sep21.205603.1@vax.sonoma.edu> fletcher@vax.sonoma.edu writes:
>I just recently read an article in the school newspaper that upset me 
>a little.  It was basically talking to the pro-choice people, telling 
>them that they need to get out and vote so that abortion can stay 
>legal.  Believe it or not but the there are quite a few people who 
>are pro-life, and it makes me so angry when so many pro-life people 
>are bagged on all of the time.  The media is so liberal that of 
>course they make pro-life people look bad!

If you have some methods for extrapolating information on an entire group
from a single sampling, I'd like to hear about it.

>It is not even a matter 
>of what kind of people we are, it is what we believe in ......THE 
>VALUE OF LIFE!!!! 

Which is why I am fighting for you to be able to chose to not have an
abortion if that is what you want.


>There are 2.6 million babies killed every year 
>because of abortion.

Have you told the media about this?!?!

>Well over half of them are strictly used for 
>birth control reasons.

Strictly? Again, you seem to be privy to a quality of knowledge of a large
group of people, heretofore unseen. Can you expound on how you know that
so many women have had abortions for 'strictly' birth control?


>Somethings wrong here!!!

Ah, here I am up to date.  I see this too.


>I always here the 
>pro-choice people saying we're just going to go back to back-alley 
>abortions ie. hanger abortions.

Again, your omniscience is astounding. THE PRO-CHOICE PEOPLE, all saying
the same thing (at the same time?) Fancy that!


>Today we are much more educated then 
>we were back then,


Hmm, who are 'We'?

> and besides I hardly doubt that 2.6 million babies 
>will be killed every year because of a hanger!

Frankly, I hadn't even heard of 2600000 babies being killed evey year at 
*all*. 

>Women would think 
>twice and would be forced to take responsibility for their actions.  

Yeah, but you know how all WOMEN are. They're just totally irresponsible,
aren't they. What would they *do* without us men keeping an eye out for
them and keeping them 'responsible'?

>Abortion is a money making business. 

And how, but if I wanted to make money, I'd more likely become an evangelist.

>Does anyone stop and think of 
>that tiny little life that is growing inside the woman's womb?

Personally, I've done *a lot* of thinking about it. I've been thinking that
it is really nothing but a parasite, in the true definition of the word
(not Black's mind you). I personally can't imagine having something 
growing inside of me at *all*. It makes me think of tape worms. I'm rather
amazed that any women would *want* to get pregnant, let alone keep a fetus
(just listen to that word, feeetusssss, ickh) if they got pregnant
without wanting to.





-- 
David Knapp                                      University of Colorado, Boulder
Perpetual Student                                   knapp@spot.colorado.edu
From: be662@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Linda S. Fox)
Newsgroups: alt.abortion.inequity
Subject: Re: Legal Questions
Date: 3 Oct 1992 15:58:35 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio (USA)
NNTP-Posting-Host: slc10.ins.cwru.edu



NO MORE DRAFT STUFF!!!!!
Come on, guys, this is a section devoted to abortion.  Flaming about a 
potential danger of being drafted into a potential war hardly compares
to the real danger of becoming pregnant for any woman.

Please comfine your comments to a more appropriate discussion area.

Linda
From: amn@owlnet.rice.edu (Analisa Marie Norris)
Subject: Observations
Organization: Rice University
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1992 21:53:49 GMT

Ray is making some excellent points about freedom vs. rights of children.  Here's an extension of that thought:

In order for something to be completely free, it MUST be restricted.  For example, you have free use of your arm, yet it is attached to your body.  Were it not attached to your body, it would be utterly useless.  Therefore, in order for this freedom to be effective, it must have some limitations.

The freedom of the 8 year old child may be viewed in the same way.  It does have the right to freedom, yet this freedom must be restricted in some ways, in order for the freedom to be meaningful.

It can therefore be safely concluded that ALL children (born and unborn) DO have rights equal to those of their parents, and abortion is WRONG.
Newsgroups: alt.abortion.inequity,talk.abortion
From: drieux@wetware.com (drieux, just drieux)
Subject: On cruel and unusual Punishment
Organization: Castle WetWare Philosopher and Sniper
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1992 18:21:28 GMT

dbarols1@cc.swarthmore.edu (deborah barolsky) writes:

] This whole discussion of whether or not making a woman who is raped, or a
] victim of incest carry the child to term is of is not  cruel and unusual
] punishment is deeply disturbing to me. Using the word punishment implies
] that the woman is in some way at fault.  at fault for what? being raped?
] this reeks of 'blame the victim'.
]   
] this is separate from the widely held belief (with which I do not agree)
] that unwanted pregnancies are the price you pay for having sex. Thus being
] forced to carry such a child to term can be seen as punishment. This
] argument does not apply, however, to survivors of rape and incest.
] 
] thus, forcing a woman who has been raped to bear the child mwy be cruel and
] unusual, but is NOT a punishment.
 
deb

	But that is precisely the point being debated,
and the nature of the debate. That such a policy would
perforce of its very nature impose a 'punishment' upon
a person for no good reason.

	This is the Flip Side of the argument that those
who hold that 'Abortion is Murder', and yet allow for it
in the case of incest or rape. So in defense of the notion
that 'Abortion is Murder' many of them have retreated away
from the direct irrationality of allowing Person A to kill
Person B for the actions of Person C towards Person A. 

And that path leads us to the position of punishing the
woman for doing that which was not her fault.

But as you point out there should be no reason to do that....

But this is the Core of the AntiAbortionist Position!

ciao
drieux




-- 
Modern Day Problems

Does that 'answer' your question,
or should I be a little more vague.
From: kingsley@hpwrce.mayfield.hp.com (Kingsley Morse)
Date: Sat, 26 Sep 1992 00:29:01 GMT
Subject: Forced Fatherhood Original Survey
Organization: HP Western Response Center
Newsgroups: alt.abortion.inequity

This is the original pilot survey on "Forced fatherhood".
=============================================================================


Do you feel comfortable discussing your 'forced fatherhood'?

Were you and the mother married?

Did you live together?

Did you want to have a child?

Did she?

Did you want an abortion?

Did she?

Did you want to put the child up for adoption?

Did she?

Did she sue you for child support?

Do you know anyone else who has been forced to be a father?

Any other thoughts?
From: kingsley@hpwrce.mayfield.hp.com (Kingsley Morse)
Date: Sat, 26 Sep 1992 00:23:37 GMT
Subject: Forced Fatherhoods Per Year
Organization: HP Western Response Center