HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
X-Envelope-to: politics@OHSTVMA.BITNET
X-VMS-To: IN%"politics@ohstvma.bitnet"
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Tue, 6 Oct 1992 06:18:36 -0500
From:         ANTHLAL@UMNACVX.BITNET
Subject:      jaime summers, alexander's breath, and white noise; or, oy ve

informational programming notes
*******************************************
jamie dreier is a male.  jaime is not his name.  jaime is, however, the
name of the bionic woman.  her boss was named oscar goldman.  they worked
for the osi.  her dog was named max.  her boyfriend was named steve.
i know, because i used to be a big fan of anything produced by glen a. larson.
quinn martin, too.  but that's another story.

alexander looked at the b-r-e-a-d-t-h of his domain.  you know...rye,
pumpernickel, whole wheat.

jason zimmerman pointed out that he is 21, i believe.  i suppose this does
not mean much.  just wanted to clear that up, for those of you who delete
his posts as you read the header file.

i can't post anything nasty about jason's somewhat ill-conceived posts.
it's in the minneapolis by-laws that you can't complain about anyone named
zimmerman.

you will all be pleased to know that the show "hard copy" has conducted its
own poll and that clinton is leading the pack.  38% clinton, 32% bush,
30% perot.  i'm still trying to figure this out.  maybe just a lot of
perot supporters like to watch the lost children stories or something.

the "straw poll" at general cinema has clinton winning by a landslide.  there
are these 2 cups...one full of bush straws, one full of clinton straws
(the perot straws are, oddly enough, in their own masking-tape-labelled
sani-straw vendor.  draw whatever conclusions you want from that.).

with her finger on the pulse of american pop culture, i thus remain

                                               anneliese.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Envelope-to: POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET
X-VMS-To: WVNET::IN%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Tue, 6 Oct 1992 16:14:44 -0400
From:         KILBURN@WVSVAX.WVNET.EDU
Subject:      Re: Prisoners Delimma

Hi, Jason:
>As I recall, the whole point of the Prisonser's Delimma is that even though it
>is in both prisoner's interests to deny that either commited the crime, they
>wind up implicating one another because it is in their INDIVIDUAL interests to
>do so.  If they could communicate with one another and be sure that they both
>denied that either had anything to do with the crime, they would be a lot
>better off.  However, their inability to communicate or enforce an agreement
>results in each prisoner choosing a non-optimal solution.
>
>This seems to be the same situation that Jamie's hypo gives us.  If firms could
>easily communicate and observe each others actions, and if they could enforce
>their agreements, they would all be better off if they discriminated in hiring.
>However, since each firm has an incentive to undercut the agreement (just as
>each prisoner in the PD has an incentive to rat out his comrade), they will
>not be able to actually achieve this result.

Actually, your explanation clarifies why PD is *not* analogous to Jamie's
example.  In his scenario, firms *do* easily communicate, observe each
others' actions, etc.  Because that condition obtains, firms maximize
individual profits and so forth (Jamie, did I get this right?  That's the
proper evolutionary analogy :)).

Kerry
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Organization: York University
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Tue, 29 Sep 1992 00:44:45 EDT
From:         MMORSE@YORKVM1.BITNET
Subject: Re: The Decline of America: Health Care (III)

Further Question for discussion: is the American brain big enough
to comprehend its own situation?:
        **     **      *    *
        **     **    *  *   *
        *********    * **   *
        **     **    *  *   *
        **     **    *  *
                            *
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Original_To:  BITNET%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Tue, 29 Sep 1992 18:00:00 EDT
From:         CMORRISO@SNYESCVA.BITNET
Subject:      Re: Perot--in, out, what?

        Missy, you surprise me.

        1.  Mike Wallace and Cher are people.

        2.  If Larry King operates like any other talk show host, he has
people answering the phones and screening calls by finding out who is
calling and what they want to say.  If Cher and Mike Wallace get through
and get on the air, it's because Larry King decides to put them on, most
likely because he feels their celebrity status will help his show.

        3.  Sounds like your phone line has some noise on it, or else
you lost your local machine.

                                        Chris Morrison
I will post some information about our local newspaper poll, which several
weeks ago put Bush ahead.  It now puts Clinton ahead.  Since 1932, the only
time a Democrat has led in their poll (according to the paper) was 1964 in
the Johnson Goldwater race.  Details later.
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
From: jwales@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (jimmy donal wales)
Subject: Re: "On American Intervention into ...," (#776)
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1992 21:03:12 GMT

Mercantilist fallacies are still with us.  

<STUSTITH@EKU.BITNET> writes:
>There is only so much consumption
>available in the United States.

*laugh*  Only so much consumption available.  Well, I can solve this
problem for the country in a heartbeat.  Just take all the extra stuff
that no one seems to be able to consume and drop it off at my house.
I'll consume the hell out of it.

Start with electronic equipment, please.

>This new form of Imperialism or Mercantilism is merely
>showing the United States protecting it's investments... an animal
>protecting a source of sustenance!

The new form of Imperialism or Mercantilism is one factor which will
help to destroy the investments of this country.  

The policies of the protectionists are as stupid and harmful as they
were 100, 200, 1000 years ago.

--Jimbo
From: ZIMMERJ@WABASH.BITNET
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Subject: Re: new tax scheme
Date: 5 Oct 92 21:32:00 GMT
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Envelope-to: politics@ohstvma.BITNET
X-VMS-To: IN%"politics@ohstvma"

From: K=A*T <MEC038@UKCC.UKY.EDU>

>Now, let me see, you pay property tax every year, that is
>if you had any property, right? Isn't THAT double/multiple taxation?

Yes, actually it is.  I'm not sure why you bring it up, though.

>And if you say property tax is for the services you receive
>every year, then I must ask, isn't federal tax for the services
>we receive EVERY year?

Supposedly, yes.  At least it should be, but federal taxes often are imposed
merely to redirect our behavior (as Dunstan advocates) or to pay for services
we received LONG ago, thanks to deficit spending.  Since we're talking theory
anyway, I'll agree that federal taxes are for services we receive each year.
Why do you you bring it up?

>And if some of those services are
>rendered to/because of our property/wealth, shouldn't we
>pay for it EVERY year, according to our wealth?

One could hypothetically argue that, yes.  I haven't, nor does the consumption
tax we've been discussing do anything resembling this.  In fact, the whole
point of an income tax (or one of them at least) is to avoid double taxation;
taxing wealth (savings) means you tax an income stream once as it comes in, and
then keep taxing the same stream every year in the form of taxes on savings.
Taxing the INCOME received from savings (like dividends) is a different matter
entirely, though.  I can go into this further, but I'm not sure exactly what
your're asking, so I'll hold off.  Please clarify your question.

--KAT
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Organization: Computer Science Department,  Stanford University.
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Fri, 2 Oct 1992 19:52:30 -0700
From:         Andy Freeman <andy@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject:      Re: "No Cost" Family Leave Bill

>It's good to see that some things are constants, such as andy jumping to
>defend those poor, embattled corporations that work so hard to provide
>(add fanfare here...) jobs. (Of course they are entirely altruistic they
>only make profits so that they can create more jobs, for us here at home.)

Misrepresentation is always a good start.

Andy thinks that corps exist to give him things he wants in return for
labor, a trade that both sides prefer to not making the trade.
Usually Andy does the trade through an exchange medium.

>What andy never seems to mention is that the private sector has been given
>enormous "incentives" (read tax breaks) to provide social benefits (more
>jobs) since Reagan took office in the 80's and have not delivered them.

Even if we grant this false premise, the proposed solution doesn't
necessarily work.

Will the received benefits of forcing companies that don't think it is
profitable to provide family leave (which supposedly employ a whopping
8% of the workforce) exceed the incurred costs?  My bet - no.

>So while we're discussing "free lunches" lets not forget who is the
>largest consumer of those free pork sandwiches...

Hint: there's a difference between a tax break and a subsidy.  One is
relative - someone else may not be getting as good a deal, while the
other is absolute - someone is getting out more than they put in.

>When you or I (average joes) get a tax credit (incentive), it is tied
>to something specific, there is a proof or test required.

So?  This doesn't imply that some good results from satisfying the
test.

-andy
--
UUCP:    {arpa gateways, sun, decwrl, uunet, rutgers}!cs.stanford.edu!andy
ARPA:    andy@cs.stanford.edu
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
From: METZE@uimrlm.mrl.uiuc.edu (Virginia Metze)
Subject: Re:      Re: Perot--in, out, what?
X-News-Reader: VMS NEWS 1.11
Organization: Ginny Metze, not speaking for anyone but myself
Date: Sun, 4 Oct 1992 02:54:40 GMT

In <92274.001735MMORSE@YORKVM1.BITNET> MMORSE@YORKVM1.BITNET writes:

# Chris Morrison claims to have a lot of respect for Jeanne Kirk-
# patrick. On what basis, pray tell? Her taste in clothes? Or in
# dictators, perhaps?
# Michael

	Maybe he got more calls like the one I made, telling
	one of his patient phone volunteers that I would
	definitely totally rule out voting for Perot if he
	had Jeanne Kirkpatrick for vice president.  She has
	been opposed to what I have been for and for what I
	have been against for so many years that I don't even
	REMEMBER all of the issues any more.  

Ginny


===============================================================================
Ginny                                  Impeach Thomas!
metze@vmetze.mrl.uiuc.edu              Impeach the Rehnquist 5, 6 or 7!
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Can any of you seriously say the Bill of Rights could get through Congress
today?  It wouldn't even get out of Committee."  F. Lee Bailey, 1967. 
===============================================================================
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Organization: Computer Science Department,  Stanford University.
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Wed, 30 Sep 1992 10:13:39 -0700
From:         Andy Freeman <andy@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Privatization replies

>>>What's to  stop them from going  under cover of darkness  and throwing
>>>everything in the  Atlantic Ocean or on the doorstep  of their leading
>>>competitor?
>>
>>The same thing that stops the public provider from doing that.
>
>Which is ... ?  That is a regulation (rather, a group of regulations).

Public vs private might well be associated with a difference
in how effective said regulation is in affecting said evil.
Competitors are additional, and motivate, "tattlers".

>>If the prices are too high  because the costs of providing the services
>>you want are too high, how will appealing to govt help?
>>If the  prices are too  high because of  excess profit, you've  found a
>>niche where you can get rich.
>
>That is  not exactly  what I  meant. I  was wondering  if a  citizen can
>appeal to the  local government if there is some  reason to suspect that
>the  company's rate  is  too  high because  of  excess  profit.

I was suggesting that there was a more effective response.

If we're only going to consider by-govt responses, there are certain
things that will be hard to do.

-andy
--
UUCP:    {arpa gateways, sun, decwrl, uunet, rutgers}!cs.stanford.edu!andy
ARPA:    andy@cs.stanford.edu
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Thu, 1 Oct 1992 20:13:42 EDT
From:         J Sullivan <JWS@BROWNVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Playing Poker

Chris Morrison:
     I was in the Army during Vietnam, but I don't recall the little boy
     with the letter.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Envelope-to: POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET
X-VMS-To: IN%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Sun, 4 Oct 1992 23:10:07 -0400
From:         "If I Were A President,
              There Would Be 2 States: Sanity and California!"
              <STUSTITH@EKU.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Thomas Jefferson & the Civil War

except that the way slavery was dealt with is the reason for over
100 years of racial prejudice on the incredible level it has been!
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Tue, 6 Oct 1992 18:55:49 EDT
From:         Jamie <PL436000@BROWNVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Prisoners Delimma

>From:         KILBURN@WVSVAX.WVNET.EDU

>Actually, your explanation clarifies why PD is *not* analogous to Jamie's
>example.  In his scenario, firms *do* easily communicate, observe each
>others' actions, etc.  Because that condition obtains, firms maximize
>individual profits and so forth (Jamie, did I get this right?  That's the
>proper evolutionary analogy :)).

Well, partly.
The other important factor is that there are many meetings.
So the proper model is the iterated PD. As you pointed out,
tit-for-tat is a cooperative strategy that is stable and
advantageous to the cooperators once the convention of playing
it is in force.
For example, suppose we find what's called "reciprocal altruism"
(using the standard definition, Kerry, not my extended one)
in some primates. Eg, some baboons come to the aid of others
in fights, at apparent cost of selective fitness.
It is not actually crucial to the example that the baboons
can communicate--evolution can take the place of reason.
But it IS crucial that the baboons interact over time, and
that they expect (or rather, could expect, since again it
isn't necessary that they understand what they're doing)
to face similar situations in the future.
What we find, as I understand it, is that some baboons tend
to cooperate with others, who they expect will cooperate with
them later on.
(It would be practically miraculous if we found cooperation in
apparent contradiction to selective fitness if the interaction
was not ongoing.)

That's a convention. It is fairly closely analogous to my
example.
It is quite stable.

Any more questions?

Jamie
From: KSTE@PURCCVM.BITNET (Kerry Stephenson)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Subject: Re: FREE-ENERGY technologies
Date: 28 Sep 92 06:03:27 GMT
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU

Gary:

The Masons!  The Masons!  You forgot the Masons!

Hmm.  Could it be a deliberate omission?

Very well, then, Gary:  Are you now or have you ever been a member of
any Masonic order?

--Missy P 2 B (dusting off the Lyndon Larouche library, just for fun.)
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Original_To:  BITNET%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Fri, 2 Oct 1992 18:35:00 EDT
From:         CMORRISO@SNYESCVA.BITNET
Subject:      Re: H. 'You People' Ross 'I don't want to be a spo

        I hope he doesn't to the extent that the Iraqgate issue starts to
look partisan.  He should maybe call attention to it, but what he should try
to do is emphasize that he does have foreign policy ideas, that he has
been studying, and that he is capable of leading in that area.  He should
maybe mention a former Governor of California and President of Screen
Actors Guild who shall remain nameless, who also was thought to have little
experience, who seemed to do alright.  Now before you guys all jump up and
down on my head, by this I mean that what he did wrong was not a result of
his lack of experience but rather because of what his goals were and his
weaknesses as a leader.

                                        Chris Morrison
                                        CMorriso@snyescva.bitnet
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Mon, 5 Oct 1992 15:31:48 EDT
From:         LOVE@TEMPLEVM.BITNET
Subject:      WINDO ALERT

                                  MEMO

From:          James Love
               Taxpayer Assets Project

RE:            Update on GPO WINDO legislation
               (HR 5983, successor to S. 2813 and HR 2772)

Date:          October 5, 1992


BACKGROUND

Congress is considering legislation that would provide the public
one-stop-shopping *online* access to federal information systems and
databases through the Government Printing Office (GPO).  The service,
which would *supplement* other agency and private sector information
products and services, would be priced at the *incremental cost of
dissemination* for most users, and be free to 1,400 federal depository
libraries.  A broad coalition of academic, library, journalist, citizen
and business groups support the legislation.

The original House bill was HR 2772, the GPO Wide Information Network
for Data Online (GPO WINDO), and the original Senate bill was S. 2813,
the GPO Gateway to Government Act.  A compromise bill, HR 5983 (which
has a number of concessions to House republicans)  was passed by the
House of Representatives on September 29, 1992.

     FMI:
     ====================================================
     fact sheets on S. 2813 and HR 2772,
     copies of S. 2813, HR 5983 or HR 5983, and
     a comparison between HR 5983 and HR 2772 and S 2813,
     can be obtained from:   tap@essential.org

     For additional information, contact the American
     Library Association at:  202/547-4440
     ====================================================

HR 5983 was scheduled for a Senate vote on friday, but it has since been
held off the Senate calendar by anonymous Senate republicans.  The
Senate leadership is trying to find who is holding the bill up, and why.
If the "holds" on the bill aren't resolved in a few days, the bill will
die, deferring action until next year at the earliest.


WHAT YOU CAN DO

If you support this important access broadening legislation, contact the
Senate leadership to urge action on the bill this year.  Since Congress
plans to adjourn this week, telephone calls are the preferred method for
making your views known.  [At this point, a single telephone call to the
right Senate office might make the difference.]

The current bill number and name is:

     HR 5983, the GPO Electronic Information Enhancement Act

Important telephone numbers to call are:

          SENATE

          Republican Leader
          Senator Robert J Dole (KA)         202/224-6521

          Assistant Republican Leader
          Senator Alan K. Simpson            202/224-3424

          Democratic Whip
          Senator Wendell H. Ford            202/224-4343


Any Senate office can be reached at:         202/224-3121

---------------------------------------------------------------
James Love                         voice:    215/658-0880
Taxpayer Assets Project            fax:      call
12 Church Road                     internet: love@essential.org
Ardmore, PA  19003
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Envelope-to: POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET
X-VMS-To: IN%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Tue, 6 Oct 1992 17:30:00 EST
From:         YONI@BROWNCOG.BITNET
Subject:      Re: Virtual election comment ...

IS there a constitution or credo that has been established concerning the
Virtual Election? When are the elections? Who is running? Are there campaign
speeches? Is this a Clinton-Bush election or POLITICS list election?
Later
Lance
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Original_To:  BITNET%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Mon, 5 Oct 1992 00:39:00 EDT
From:         CMORRISO@SNYESCVA.BITNET
Subject:      RE: We, The Persons

        It used to be people on the Left used the term AMERIKA and were
made fun of by people on the Right.  Lately it seems that the sort of
inarticulate paranoia that used to characterize the New Left has been taken
over by the Far Right.  I think this is wonderful, because it will marginalize
the Far Right in the same way that it marginalized the New Left.

        This post is an excellent example.  It starts with a perfectly
legitimate argument and turns it into a farce.

                                        Chris Morrison
                                        CMorriso@snyescva.bitnet
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Organization: Computer Science Department,  Stanford University.
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Mon, 28 Sep 1992 15:29:57 -0700
From:         Andy Freeman <andy@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Simple(?) questions

>What's to stop
>them from going  under cover of darkness and throwing  everything in the
>Atlantic Ocean or on the doorstep of their leading competitor?

The same thing that stops the public provider from doing that.

Note that other private providers have an incentive to squeal.

>  Now, suppose you are not lucky enough  to find a company that is worth
>its  services to  you? What  do you  do then?  Lower your  expectations?
>Pay the  extraordinarily high rate? Would  you be able to  appeal to the
>local government at all?

If the prices are too high because the costs of providing the services
you want are too high, how will appealing to govt help?

If the prices are too high because of excess profit, you've found
a niche where you can get rich.

-andy
--
UUCP:    {arpa gateways, sun, decwrl, uunet, rutgers}!cs.stanford.edu!andy
ARPA:    andy@cs.stanford.edu