HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: jmunro@wyse.wyse.com (Jim Munro x2497)
Newsgroups: sci.econ,soc.culture.usa,soc.culture.japan,soc.culture.british,soc.culture.canada
Subject: Re: US as No. 1 (3 data books)
Date: 27 Jan 93 20:49:19 GMT
Article-I.D.: wyse.4046
Followup-To: sci.econ
Organization: Wyse Technologies San Jose, Ca

In article <C1IH0o.MJx@news.chalmers.se> d9bertil@dtek.chalmers.se (Bertil Jonell) writes:
>
>>Mandatory government/military service
>
>  It teaches people how to handle guns, and handle themselves around guns,
>and is IMHO the single greatest factor in the difference in murder statistics.
>

If this were even remotely true, then those countries with no military service
requirements would have much higher murder rates, right?    wrong!

There are many social and historical factors which tend to make
the US a more violence prone society. However, the sheer number and availability
of guns has to be the single most important factor which corrolates with
the high murder rate.

You will note that almost no politician has the guts to stand up for real
restrictions on guns. Right now there is renewed discussion on getting rid
of assault rifles. So what. That will only mean that there will only be about
ten thousand other types of firearms to purchase.

The gun lobby and its pawn, the NRA has successfully got the American poulation
to believe that any restricion is bad and against the constitution.

The constitution clearly talks about the right to bear 'arms'. The government has
successfully banned all kinds of 'arms' including certain knives, blackjacks, etc..

A friend of mine was burgled and when the police searched his house for evudence
they found a handgun and a cosh belonging to my elderly friend. They confiscated
the cosh citing it as 'illegal'. 

I say ban the manufacture, sale, and/or export of all firearms and ammunition
except for strictly military and controlled 'sporting' purposes. Put the handgun makers out of business.

Jim Munro
Newsgroups: sci.econ,soc.culture.usa,soc.culture.japan,soc.culture.british,soc.culture.canada
From: rdavis@convex.com (Ray Davis)
Subject: Re: US as No. 1 (3 data books)
Organization: CONVEX Computer Corporation, Richardson, Tx., USA
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 00:30:25 GMT
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.

Adrian.Waterworth@newcastle.ac.uk (Adrian Waterworth) writes:

>As for the availability of
>different goods and services, I find it hard to believe that the range
>of products available in the US is so much greater than those in any
>other developed nation.

Really it is.  You wouldn't believe how much more the selection
and variety is in most areas of merchandise.  I know it's hard
to believe, but if you grew up in the states and find yourself
living elsewhere, you wonder how folks can put up with so little
choice and such crap quality (in *some* cases - not all!).

On the minus side, us Amis have to put up with a buttload of
competition between all these companies, which results in much
too much advertisement [the `s' for your benefit B-)].  Aaaargh!
Most of europe isn't plagued with the everpresent billboard in
yer face.

>From a personal point of view, I cannot think
>of anything significant that I might want to obtain that I couldn't
>obtain here in the UK.

Well how could you if you don't know what you're missing, or you're
not used to the selection?

>>While most people know recent immigrants, I doubt it has much impact
>>upon the self-image of the US.
>
>	That one I don't know.  Any USA-nians (sorry!) want to comment
>on that?

Sure.  Not to agree or dissagree with the foreperson's comments, I'd
note that the density of immigrants to native born Americans is low
enough to almost go unnoticed.  Think about it - the US is a huge
place.  It doesn't have a bunch of other countries with vastly different
cultures around it ('taint much difference in Canada except the language
in Quebec, and Mexico is a wonderful place - but poor).  Why do you
think USA-nians (don't be sorry!) are amazed that so many Europeans
(Uk-nians not included) speak more than one language. [whoa! schwing!]

> Adrian.Waterworth@newcastle.ac.uk

What ever happened to the old castle?

Ray
Newsgroups: sci.econ
From: radford@cs.toronto.edu (Radford Neal)
Subject: Re: Inflation
Organization: Department of Computer Science, University of Toronto
Date: 22 Jan 93 17:05:39 GMT

In article <2306@blue.cis.pitt.edu> wbdst+@pitt.edu (William B Dwinnell) writes:

>... the point I am trying to make is that inflation would
>occur even in a free market without government intervention (the perpetual
>bad guy), and even without money... I am claiming that inflation would 
>occur without either the government or money, as "natural" inflation 
>will raise prices, due to the fact that if you sit on something, you waste 
>its useful value....

This is an interesting argument, but I'm not sure it proves what the
poster thinks. 

First of all, just as a matter of nomenclature, using the word "inflation"
to refer to "the fact that if you sit on something, you waste its useful 
value" is so far from common usage of the term that it can only lead to
confusion.  Everyone else I know uses the word inflation to refer either 
to (a) an increase in the money supply, or (b) a general decrease in the 
amount of tangible goods or services that a unit of money can buy.  The
two are closely linked, making this ambiguity tolerable.  By either of
these definitions, the concept of "inflation" does not apply to a economy
without money.

However, though the poster refers to a situation "without money", I
don't think he really means it.  I assume that the only reason someone
would "sit on something", wasting its useful value, is if they are
holding on to it in anticipation of being able to exchange it for
something that is more useful to them in the future - i.e. if the
commodity is being used as money.  For example, someone might hold on
to gold for use as money, even if the gold could be doing something
useful, like plugging the holes in their teeth.

Such a situation is indeed undesirable, but is not a major factor now,
nor, that I am aware of, in the past.  One of the reasons gold is a good
monetary commodity is that it really doesn't have all that many
practical uses.  Nowadays, everyone uses paper or electronic money, 
which has no virtually no natural value at all. 

In an economy truely without money, the concept of inflation is
meaningless.  It is, however, still possible to talk about the
standard of living of the people, and this could certainly decrease.
Describing this as "inflation" is not a good idea, however, since in
an economy with money, it is perfectly possible for the standard of
living to decrease without inflation occurring (using the common
meaning of "inflation").

    Radford Neal
From: cmk@athena.mit.edu (Charles M Kozierok)
Newsgroups: sci.econ
Subject: Re: Inflation
Date: 24 Jan 93 16:38:21 GMT
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology

In article <1993Jan23.183507.28658@csi.uottawa.ca> cbbrowne@csi.uottawa.ca (Christopher Browne) writes:
>In article <1993Jan23.170436.10269@athena.mit.edu> cmk@athena.mit.edu (Charles M Kozierok) writes:
>>interest is simply rent for the use of a dollar. if that dollar
>>will be worth 4 cents less a year from now, then i will include that
>>amount in the rent i charge. you'll have to explain how it works the
>>other way around. i don't see it.
>
>Supposing the basic interest rate is 4%, and there is no other source
>of inflation, then it would be rather difficult to have an inflation
>rate of below 4%, expressed as follows:
>
>If I have $100, and keep it in the form of currency for 1 year, then
>at the end of that period I still have $100.
>
>Unfortunately, that won't buy me as much as I'd have if I had lent out
>the money at the interest rate of 4%.
>
>Holding money costs 4%, and this will encourage the inflation rate to
>grow toward 4%.
>
>The presence of interest WILL result in some inflation.
>
>Interest is a "monetary" influence in the economy, and there is no
>contradiction in having it cause some inflation.

i disagree with this analysis, though i openly claim not to be
an expert on the matter.

first, based on this analysis interest rates and inflation would
chase each other's tails to infinity at no time at all.

second, history shows that inflation and interest rates *do* usually
maintain a gap. your claim that inflation below interest rates
would be hard to happen is not empirically indicated.

third, some explanation. if you hold on to your $100 instead of
investing it, you are doing so because you feel that you will get
some benefit from doing so. *that* is compensation for the 4% you
don't earn by investing. simple opportunity cost trade-off, as i see
it. holding money does not cost 4%.

now you could argue that the 4% that somone has to pay to get
capital to build something to sell will impact the price; and that
if it went up to 15% then prices would increase. i agree. but that
effect is only one of rental cost, and is no more important than the
cost of renting equipment or buildings.

so, i agree that there is *some* causality, but nowhere near the
amount you previously claimed.
--
charles
Xref: sparky sci.econ:9897 soc.culture.usa:10191 soc.culture.japan:14388 soc.culture.british:19519 soc.culture.canada:10468
From: jmunro@wyse.wyse.com (Jim Munro x2497)
Newsgroups: sci.econ,soc.culture.usa,soc.culture.japan,soc.culture.british,soc.culture.canada
Subject: Re: US as No. 1 (3 data books)
Date: 26 Jan 93 21:28:00 GMT
Article-I.D.: wyse.4037
Followup-To: sci.econ
Organization: Wyse Technologies San Jose, Ca

In article <1993Jan26.165916.13401@sunova.ssc.gov> pamela@sscux1.ssc.gov (pamela gurd) writes:
>In article <1993Jan26.114023.28748@adobe.com> cjackson@adobe.com (Curtis Jackson) writes:
>>
>>Americans look at other countries and see things by which
>>Americans are not constrained:
>>
>>Official state religions
>

Well despite the lack of established religion, the US still manages to bring
religion into almost everything. Evry coin says 'In God We Trust' for starters.
Every President is expected to be an active Christian, the airwaves are jammed with
fundamentalist claptrap, and even schoolbooks are 'cebsored' by fundamentalist
groups who have successfully fought for the exclusion of overtly Darwinian
material.

Every school or College graduation is opened and closed by a religious figure.

Give me the good old styate religion anytime. I went to a Church sponsored school,
as did my children. We all learned by example at an early age a healthy 
disrespect for religion and its practioners. After all, if it is forced on
you by the government it must be bad right?

Here, it is a parents job to teach a chil;d religion. Because, the state is
'forbidden' to teach anything, a parent or a church school can teach anything
it wants as 'fact' and get away with it.

Jim Munro
From: wbdst+@pitt.edu (William B Dwinnell)
Newsgroups: sci.econ
Subject: Re: Inflation
Date: 25 Jan 93 22:35:28 GMT
Organization: University of Pittsburgh


There are determinants of inflation other than interest rates. If this were
not the case, than deflation could not occurr while inflationxxxxxx
interest existed. But interest has always existed, and deflation has
appearred, particularly around the great depression, and in the postwar
era. Other things influence inflation, but htexx the point is that
interetst rates generate some inflation, even when that influence is
overshadowed by other things. Eventually, the 2 will settle
somewhere, as people cannot save everything they make.
Newsgroups: sci.econ
From: wbdst+@pitt.edu (William B Dwinnell)
Newsgroups: sci.econ,soc.culture.usa,soc.culture.japan,soc.culture.british,soc.culture.canada
Subject: Re: US as No. 1 (3 data books)
Date: 26 Jan 93 19:14:29 GMT
Followup-To: sci.econ
Organization: University of Pittsburgh


Pam: I must say that you make some very good points regarding life in
the United States. Although the argument might be made that, as 
at least in some respects the United States is the best country, relative
to other countries, it seems like little comfort, when I think of how good
it could be in an absolute sense. Being the best, relative to others, is
really a function of the quality of your neighbors. I guess what I'm trying
to say is that while America may rank 1st on some lists, that doesn't
mean there isn't plenty of room for improvement.

Xref: sparky sci.econ:9871 soc.college.grad:2360
From: oq8y@vax5.cit.cornell.edu
Newsgroups: sci.econ,soc.college.grad
Subject: Summer internships for econ
Date: 27 Jan 93 11:57:14 EST
Distribution: sci,soc
Organization: Cornell University

Sorry about the last posting.  I have a question:
Does anyone know a good source of summer interships for graduate
students?  I am a 2nd year PhD student in economics, and
would like to actually use some skills this summer.
any ideas?
Jon Cohodas

Newsgroups: sci.econ
From: golchowy@alchemy.chem.utoronto.ca (Gerald Olchowy)
Subject: Re: US as No. 1 (3 data books)
Organization: University of Toronto Chemistry Department
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1993 02:38:01 GMT

In article <2423@blue.cis.pitt.edu> wbdst+@pitt.edu (William B Dwinnell) writes:
>
>How large is Canada's population, when compared to that of the
>United States?

Canada has about one-tenth the population of the United States.

Gerald
Xref: sparky sci.econ:9883 soc.culture.usa:10148 soc.culture.japan:14338 soc.culture.british:19474 soc.culture.canada:10429
From: fulk@cs.rochester.edu (Mark Fulk)
Newsgroups: sci.econ,soc.culture.usa,soc.culture.japan,soc.culture.british,soc.culture.canada
Subject: Re: US as No. 1 (3 data books)
Date: 27 Jan 93 20:16:45 GMT
Organization: University of Rochester

In article <2937207291.3.p00168@psilink.com> "James F. Tims" <p00168@psilink.com> writes:
>I would like to make a passing observation about Texas.  My whole family 
>is from Texas.  All my grandfathers/grandfathers/uncles/aunts, etc., are 
>from Texas and live there now.  I have lived in Texas.  Do not mistake 
>Texas with the United States.  Legally, it is one of the states, but 
>when one is in Texas, one is in a whole 'nother country, as they say.

I couldn't pass up the chance to make a couple more observations.

Claude Scales, a dear friend in New York, was involved in the effort to
get Texas into the Union, electrically.

For many decades, the other 47 contiguous states have all belonged to the
national electrical grid.  Texas didn't; that way, it didn't have to
submit to Federal regulation.  However, the law was written that if any
Texas utility were ever to buy or sell electricity via the grid, Texas
would fall under regulation.  A New Jersey utility bought a small Texas
Panhandle electric company, and an Oklahoma company just over the border.
It then ran a DC line (Texas, not being on the grid, was a bit off-frequency
for an AC connection) to the Panhandle.  They kept this line going for
a few years, then announced it and sued successfully to have Texas join
the grid.,

Computer users in Texas rejoiced: at last their computers' line clocks kept
time with the rest of the US!

I have seen it claimed (but haven't verified) that Texas retains the legal
right to secede from the US.  Although many of us keep hoping, it hasn't
happened yet :-).

Mark
-- 
Mark A. Fulk			University of Rochester
Computer Science Department	fulk@cs.rochester.edu
Xref: sparky sci.econ:9814 soc.culture.usa:10035 soc.culture.japan:14141 soc.culture.british:19293 soc.culture.canada:10280
From: wbdst+@pitt.edu (William B Dwinnell)
Newsgroups: sci.econ,soc.culture.usa,soc.culture.japan,soc.culture.british,soc.culture.canada
Subject: Re: US as No. 1 (3 data books)
Date: 24 Jan 93 01:01:35 GMT
Followup-To: sci.econ
Organization: University of Pittsburgh


How large is Canada's population, when compared to that of the
United States?
From: wbdst+@pitt.edu (William B Dwinnell)
Newsgroups: sci.econ
Subject: Re: Inflation
Date: 22 Jan 93 23:33:58 GMT
Organization: University of Pittsburgh


  But money does have value. It has as much value as anything it will buy,
no?  
   Also: you state that we cannot have inflation with no money. But, then, I ask,
why is it that you only measure prices (which are what inflate, in 
inflation) in money? Why not in other goods? In fact, is that not how
we benchmark money itself, through things like the CPI, which is a
bacxxx basket of goods?
[By the way, I'd like to apologize for the apalling job I am doing
of editing my messages, I am new to this Unix editor.]
Xref: sparky sci.econ:9881 soc.culture.usa:10143 soc.culture.japan:14336 soc.culture.british:19467 soc.culture.canada:10424
From: cjackson@adobe.com (Curtis Jackson)
Newsgroups: sci.econ,soc.culture.usa,soc.culture.japan,soc.culture.british,soc.culture.canada
Subject: Re: US as No. 1 (3 data books)
Date: 26 Jan 93 17:20:37 GMT
Article-I.D.: adobe.1993Jan26.172037.2804
Organization: Adobe Systems Incorporated, Mountain View

In article <1993Jan26.120132.21873@cas.org> jac54@cas.org () writes:
}	Going back to food, the U.S. offers some of the worst sausage
}	it has ever been my dubious privilege to taste.  Oscar Meyer
}	would cause riots in the streets in Poland, never mind Germany.

Ah, but that is our *chief* advantage, you see. The unwashed masses
may eat Oscar Meyer sausages, drink Budweiser beer, and eat Velveeta
brand processed American cheese-like (not!) food-style product, but
I don't. And why not? BECAUSE I DON'T HAVE TO, here in the SF bay
area.

What America lacks in the large commercial advertised arena it more
than makes up for in small local businesses, many of them run by
Nth-generation immigrants, where N is a small number. So I get my
sausages at one of several local German delis, I get my beer from
local microbreweries, and I get my cheese from local organic dairies.
I also get my Thai food at restaurants run by Thai immigrants, my
Vietnamese food at Vietnamese-run restaurants, and my Japanese cooking
ingredients at a large local Japanese-run grocery.

I have these wonderful nearly-infinite choices of locally-produced
good quality foods, yet I still have the advantage of the electronics
and clothing and myriad other consumer goods mass-produced in this
country. So the American advantage is that the things we lack on a
national scale can usually be made here by small businesses run by
people who know how to do them right, whereas the things that Europe
lacks would require huge capital investment and large factories.

And, yes, Iowa is horrible, but America is so huge and diverse (despite
the raging on-slaught of generic television and fast food franchises)
that one can choose to live in some place almost, but not quite,
completely unlike Iowa, yet remain in the same country.
-- 
Curtis Jackson			'91 Black Lab/Blue Heeler "Studley Doright"
cjackson@mv.us.adobe.com	'92 Collie/Golden "George"
DoD #721	KotB		'91 Hawk GT	'81 Maxim 650
"I'd rather die while I'm living than live while I'm dead." -- J. Buffett
Newsgroups: sci.econ
From: cmk@athena.mit.edu (Charles M Kozierok)
Subject: Re: Since no one is defending inflation, (was re: Inflation)
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1993 16:54:50 GMT

In article <2399@blue.cis.pitt.edu> wbdst+@pitt.edu (William B Dwinnell) writes:
>
>charles, you say that inflation is a "lie", which "leads to workers
>thinking they are getting increases due to increased efficiency
>when they are just keeping pace." I have no doub that people may
>be misled by the numbers, and that managers (or others) may use 
>such statistics against workers (as they say, "Figures don't lie,
>but liars can figure."), but this hardly seems to be the fault of
>anyone but workers. Now, before anyone mails me a bomb, understand
>carfeulxxxxx carefully what I just said: that there are detrimental
>effects of inflation, but workers getting fooled, is the workers'
>fault, for not being informed. As adults in society, they have the
>responsibility to take care of themselves. Basic math is 
>something which anyone should be able to handle, in order to know
>their own business (although, sadly, many don't), but if they don't,
>why should we direct blame elsewhere?

an illusion which creates a deceptive situation deserves as much
of the blame (at least) as those it fools. even if most of the populace
should know better, they don't -- as such, that is one drawback of
inflation.

it is not a matter of basic math. it is just a natural tendency that
inflation is often not considered when things increase in price. just
as people may "blame" the store when the price of milk goes up, they
similarly attribute "credit" to themselves when they get a raise
which is in fact just inflation compensation. 

--
charles
From: david@cats.ucsc.edu (David Michael Wright)
Newsgroups: sci.econ
Subject: Re: Since no one is defending inflation, (was re: Inflation)
Date: 26 Jan 93 01:13:18 GMT
Organization: University of California; Santa Cruz
NNTP-Posting-Host: kerr247-ws-2.ucsc.edu


In article <1993Jan25.141513.21131@csi.uottawa.ca> cbbrowne@csi.uottawa.ca (Christopher Browne) writes:
|In article <1993Jan24.163027.3144@athena.mit.edu> cmk@athena.mit.edu (Charles M Kozierok) writes:
|>In article <1993Jan23.182032.28056@csi.uottawa.ca> cbbrowne@csi.uottawa.ca (Christopher Browne) writes:
|>>In article <1993Jan23.165450.9818@athena.mit.edu> cmk@athena.mit.edu (Charles M Kozierok) writes:
|>>>an illusion which creates a deceptive situation deserves as much
|>>>of the blame (at least) as those it fools. even if most of the populace
|>>>should know better, they don't -- as such, that is one drawback of
|>>>inflation.
|>>
|>>After the fairly extensive amount of inflation which people have seen
|>>particularly over the past 100 years, it is NOT likely that there are
|>>many people who are unaware of the presence of inflation.
|>>
|>>It's difficult to decieve people who ARE aware that inflation exists.
|>
|>i disagree, though i don't think either of us can prove it. when inflation
|>pushes both wages and prices higher, i think most people only see
|>inflation as pushing prices higher, and that they somehow "deserve" the
|>full amount of their wage increase.
|
|It's well nigh unto impossible to analyze your assertion, as it does
|not represent the "rational expectations" that economics normally
|assumes.  Assuming "irrational expectations" allows you to assume
|essentially anything that you want, and makes it terribly difficult to
|come to ANY conclusions.
|

Rational Expectations are quite irrational. It is irrational to assume
people know apriori the model and the parameters of the economy. However.
you are correct that economics normally assumes Rational Expectations.
However, you can get nearly any result you want with an RE model provided you
specify the right constraints. Money illusion could be the result of
information or contractual asymetries. It could be signaling problems
or imperfect information if you like. Irrational expectations, such as
bounded rationality may give you what you want: which is a theory that
seems consistent with the economic data of high inflation and output.
-- 
"There is nothing in the marginal conditions that     
    distinguish a mountain from a mole hill"            
                      Kenneth Boulding                             

					All comments  are mine---(David Wright) 
						david@cats.ucsc.edu.
Xref: sparky sci.econ:9901 soc.culture.usa:10199 soc.culture.british:19530 soc.culture.canada:10475