HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: cmk@athena.mit.edu (Charles M Kozierok)
Subject: Re: Negative Income Tax (Was: Social programs)
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1992 01:58:44 GMT

In article <1992Dec30.205955.21776@news.columbia.edu> gld@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Gary L Dare) writes:
>robinson@mdd.comm.mot.com (Jim Robinson) writes:
>>Gary L Dare (gld@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu) wrote:
>>
>>>However, numerous guests from the Republican and Libertarian side
>>>on CNN Crossfire persist in that notion, and that is the general
>>>impression that has been left on people.  John C. Whitehead, ...
>>
>>Gotta go w/ Charles on this one: Reagan was as much a fiscal
>>conservative as was David Peterson; the only difference being on
>>which area(s) to spend like a banshee - military or social.

good comparison.

>>Gary,
>>would I be wrong if I guessed that Mr Whitehead is one of the
>>Reagan-can-do-no-wrong Republicans?
>
>Absolutely right ... considering the movement that swept Ron into the
>White House, he was the closest that was palatable in the realpolitik
>that prevailed at the time.  So far, no true fiscal conservative has
>ever made it into office -- not even Mags.

oh, so *now* Thatcher was a "true fiscal conservative" but Reagan was
not. how consistent. what a pleasure it is conducting a debate with
someone so logical and thorough.

>As I said, and you concur,
>folks like John C. Whitehead "persist in that notion" so nobody on the
>Republican side need consider looking any further than Ronnie Reagan's
>example* -- after all, Ronnie tried and threw up his hands after ~18
>months.

according to Senator Rudman, Reagan could have mustered the votes
in 198*6* to end the indexing of social security benefits, but didn't.
explain that. unlike Bush, he had the ability to work with congress
on the debt, and he didn't. explain that.

>Jack Kemp has been trying to look "for real" but he shows
>that he has a heart as well as a brain.  Bush could have done better
>by being his own man and only going conservative on finances without
>any conflict with his real self (i.e., up 'til summer 1979) but blew
>it.

*what* does that mean?
even those who think *Reagan* was fiscally conservative don't think that
Bush ever was. this is getting ridiculous...

>What Reagan did has defined the popular definition of "fiscal
>conservative" for the lay American public ...

what Reagan did was *warp* the definition of "fiscal conservative" for
all the baa-ing woolly mammals in north america.

>sorta what happened to
>"liberal" (i.e., nothing to do with the UK party of Disraeli and of
>Churchill).

what a joke. where do you come up with this crap?

>*Think about it.  Mulroney came into power *after* Reagan and Thatcher.
>He knew how much room he had with which to maneuvre ...

oh yeah, poor guy. nothing he could do. gee, Gary, he sure *told*
us he could do a lot. but i guess we owe him *infinite* benefit of the
doubt.

--
charles
Newsgroups: soc.culture.canada
From: golchowy@alchemy.chem.utoronto.ca (Gerald Olchowy)
Subject: Re: Loss of Faith in Canada 
Organization: University of Toronto Chemistry Department
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 05:42:29 GMT

In article <13740@grayt> grayt@Software.Mitel.COM (Tom Gray) writes:
>
>I agree that this forum is not representative of Canadian opinion. However
>the Canada of 1992 is not the same Canada that existed in 1985. The trauma
>that was forced upon the country in the imposition of the FTA, GST, Meech
>Lake and Charlottetown, has changed something and not for the better.
>
>Canadians have lost faith in their system of government. The antipathy
>towards politicians and political solutions now presetn in Canada does
>seem to reflect in some manner the attitudes of the libertarians.
>Canada has turned insular both socially and politically.

There is no nascent or established political movement that is
libertarian in nature in Canada...or even really tending that way...
of any real significance, that is.

In fact, the tendency is noticably anti-libertarian right now...
...certainly there is an antipathy towards politicians these days,
but that is because the bills for the government excesses of the
last twenty years are coming due, and the free lunch financed on
public borrowing is over.

We certainly need a political movement in Canada that is interested
in liberty...but there is certainly none evident...at best one has
a choice of the lesser of evils.  Mainstream politics in Canada
has become hopelessly "politically correct", and pretty much captured
by it flawed trendy totalitarian ideas of the baby-boom generation.

It may be a blessing that we may perhaps be "saved" from the worst
excesses in ideology of the boom generation by the debt overhang.

Gerald

Xref: sparky soc.culture.canada:9733 can.politics:11158
From: gld@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Gary L Dare)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.canada,can.politics
Subject: Re: Negative Income Tax (Was: Social programs)
Date: 3 Jan 93 17:41:41 GMT
Reply-To: gld@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Gary L Dare)
Organization: The Bates Motel

golchowy@alchemy.chem.utoronto.ca (Gerald Olchowy) writes:
>
>Too bad more Objectivists would not read Les Miserables along with 
>Atlas Shrugged.

Dickens would also be appropriate, as Objectivists would be just a tad
suspicious of Victor Hugo as the French encoded many of the things now
standing accused as "socialism" into their culture long before that
word existed and Napoleon wrote it up in the Code Civil ...

gld
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Je me souviens ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Gary L. Dare
> gld@cunixd.cc.columbia.EDU 		Support NAFTA
> gld@cunixc.BITNET			 Eat Mexican  (El Teddy's ad)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.canada
From: robinson@mdivax1.uucp (Jim Robinson)
Subject: Re: Moving to Canada
Reply-To: robinson@mdd.comm.mot.com (Jim Robinson)
Organization: Motorola - Mobile Data Division; Richmond, BC
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL8]
Date: 21 Dec 92 17:48:52 GMT

godfrey@vxdesy.desy.de wrote:
>In article <1992Dec20.062243.28284@spartan.ac.BrockU.CA>, bross@spartan.ac.BrockU.CA (Brian J Ross) writes:
>> myhui@bnr.ca (Michael Hui) writes:
>> : In article <1992Dec20.010043.1@vxdesy.desy.de> godfrey@vxdesy.desy.de writes:
>> : >What's so boring about it?  The people.
>> 
>> If so, the NRC shouldn't have fired you, no matter how unprofessional
>> you undoubtedly are: Canada can always use boring people like yourself 
>> to join our ranks.
>> 

>Like all Canadians, you find it very difficult to grasp even the simplest
>of concepts, don't you.  I must have told you 5 times at least that I 
>resigned from the NRC just after they extended my position by a further
>two years.  Where I come from we don't call that "getting fired".  I
>have also refered you in the past to a whole host of newspaper articles
>about my resignation that appeared in the Canadian press in Feb/March 1987
>as proof of my claims, but you will insist on sticking to your ideas in the
>face of evidence to the contrary.  That's Canadian professionalism, I guess.

Don't be a total oaf, Laurence. We have all heard your story ad nauseum.
And, if you can't understand why you would be tweaked with it when you
continue to tweak Canadians & Canada about an alleged lack of
culture/excitement/etc, then I suggest a remedial course in human nature.
-- 
Jim Robinson
robinson@mdd.comm.mot.com
{ubc-cs!van-bc,uunet}!mdivax1!robinson

Newsgroups: soc.culture.canada,talk.politics.misc
From: cmk@athena.mit.edu (Charles M Kozierok)
Subject: Re: Death of Canada (Was: Death of America)
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Date: Sun, 27 Dec 1992 16:27:54 GMT

In article <1992Dec19.041510.781@news.columbia.edu> gld@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Gary L Dare) writes:
>cmk@athena.mit.edu (Charles M Kozierok) writes:
>>btw, seen the dollar lately? it's heading back below $.70, you know
>>that, don't you?
>
>Since it's steadied at under 79 cents, I'll hold off on buying Canuck
>bucks then ... but if you're wrong, then I'm firing you as my broker!
>(-;

ha ha. another serious issue is a big joke for you, right?

>>>While I find Reform a little strong for my Red Tory, fiscal 
>>>conservative/social liberal beliefs
>>
>>what an oxymoron.
>
>No, most modern descendants of what American libertarians refer to as
>"classic European liberals" (and claim heritage from - ?!?!?) are
>Paddy Ashdown's Liberal Party in Britain, Chirac's Rassemblement pour
>le Republique (RPR) in France and various Red Tories (Joe Clark and
>Flora MacDonald in the Conservative Party, John Napier "sold my soul
>for rock 'n roll" Turner when he was back on Bay Street, Paul Martin
>Jr. and Robert Kaplan of the Liberals) fall into this category ...
>Kohl, too, although the Christian Democrats are an odd conglomeration.

very nice deletion of my explanation and replacement with ... what
exactly is the above? stream of consciousness writing?


>>if you doubt me, pick up the book "Bankruptcy: 1995" by Harry E. 
>>Figgie,  Jr. it shows how debt is swallowing the US government.
>
>I found a thread on that book in Misc.invest when checking it after
>this week's IBM stock plunge (plus, every grad who got an offer from
>them is now on ice ... I just interviewed there myself).  By the way,
>mainframes aren't dead ... I just killed every Sun server (of varying
>sizes) at Columbia with one of my circuit simulations this week ... 
>no mainframe that I can get ahold of here 'cos it's calculating the
>Christmas paycheques this weekend.

i'm really glad i don't have to conduct meaningful conversations with
you anymore, Gary. you leave me speechless with monologues like the
above. you just demonstrate your unwillingness to look at the real
problems. you'll be swept away with the rest.

>>>(but I don't mind; I'm proud (-; to be a 
>>>socialist!).
>>
>>geez. since you put your smiley next to "proud" and not next to "socialist",
>
>Nitpicking again? (-; In case you haven't noticed, I like to line up
>my right margins as best I can; ragged-right looks best on ASCII
>displays, and ESC-2 ESC-Q can give Terry   Thomas toothgaps in  text
>(that's EMACS, folks).

how homely.

>We're outta here ... and so am I (and, I was running backups the last
>time that I ran into him! (-;)
>
>gld (having an average weekend ...)

further communication with this lifeform is likely to be futile...

--
charles
Newsgroups: soc.culture.canada
From: phvas@marlin.jcu.edu.au (Vlad Soukhanovsky)
Subject: Memorial University: help
Summary: gg
Keywords: gg
Organization: James Cook University
Date: Thu, 24 Dec 92 04:39:59 GMT

Could anybody tell me what an email address of the Memorial University
(Newfoundland) looks like. Thank you.

-- 
Vlad Soukhanovsky                            ,-_|\
phvas@marlin.jcu.edu.au                     /     \
see finger information for                  \_,-._/
further details                                  v    
Newsgroups: soc.culture.canada,can.politics
From: ramirez@julia.math.ucla.edu (Alice Ramirez)
Subject: Canadians complacent?????????
Organization: UCLA Mathematics Department
Distribution: na
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 92 05:53:47 GMT

I am somewhat bewildered by the rather spiteful anti-Canadian rantings of
T.A. Kaldis.  His comment "...Canadians are so complacently willing to
surrender their fundamental personal liberties (not to mention ever 
increasing amounts of tax dollars) to a government..."(etc. etc., ad nausium)

I was in Winnepeg visiting friends during their recent city election
(not to mention the Charlottetown Accord issue voted upon either one or
two days earlier). I won't go into the high voter turnout i.e., participation
that far exceeded anything I've noticed in the U.S.  The point I reallyB
want to make is that I saw little or no complacency.  In the Wpg city
elections, they basically "threw the bums out" and elected a woman
of absolutely no political connection or background for the position
of Mayor.  As it was explained to me, the locals are very VERY pissed
off at their high and increasing taxes and used this election to send
a very clear message. 

Someone might call Canadians many things, but complacent?  I think not.
I didn't see very many complacent Canadians while I was up there visiting
Canadian friends.  


Newsgroups: soc.culture.canada,can.politics,talk.abortion,talk.politics.animals
From: mcochran@nyx.cs.du.edu (Mark A. Cochran)
Subject: Re: Abortion, Caves, Galen (WAS Vegetarianism and abortion)
X-Disclaimer: Nyx is a public access Unix system run by the University
	of Denver for the Denver community.  The University has neither
	control over nor responsibility for the opinions of users.
Organization: None worth mentioning.
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 92 20:23:51 GMT

In article <1992Dec29.195713.12558@mdivax1.uucp> robinson@mdd.comm.mot.com (Jim Robinson) writes:
>Mark A. Cochran (mcochran@nyx.cs.du.edu) wrote:
>>In article <schuck.725651129@sfu.ca> Bruce_Schuck@sfu.ca writes:
>
>>>I understand perfectly well that within the womb the *functions* of
>>>breathing etc. are different.
>>>
>>No Bruce, the function is not different, the *structure* is different.
>>Thanks to the patent ductus arteriosus and the foramen ovale, the
>>structure and function of the heart are completly different.
>>Continue to deny the differences if you choose, but they do exist.
>
>Without getting involved in the abortion issue itself, I was wondering if
>you could explain in lay terms (i.e., forget phrases like "foramen ovale")
>how the actual structure of the heart could change due to birth. This seems
>rather counter-intuitive.

I'll give it a shot. The PDA and the FO are openings in the coronary
system. The PDA provides direct connection between the pulmonary
artery and the aorta. The FO connects the right and left atria across
the septum. These connections are necessary for correct circulation of
blood through the umbillicus and placenta. They remain open until
birth. After expulsion from the birth canal, the baby takes it's first
breath. This breath causes a change in the blood gases (oxygen and CO2
dissolved in the blood, primarily) which triggers the body to close
the holes. If this does not occur, we have problems. PDA is normally
treated by surgical closure at age 4-10. Before this is done, the
child will be short of breath with mild to moderate exertion. Failure
of the foramen ovale to close results in atrial septal defect, which
is a *major* problem. If not treated, the infant will die. It
occasionally responds to IV infusion of Inderal, although the reasons
for this are unknown at this time. The more common treatment is
surgical interfention to close the hole.
That's a *very* simplified explanation of what goes on, but it's in
lay terms. :)

--
                  Mark Cochran          merlin@eddie.ee.vt.edu
These are the views of my employer. They also represent the views of
your employer, your government, the Church of your choice, and the
Ghost of Elvis. So there.
Newsgroups: soc.culture.canada
From: craigen@ace.acadiau.ca (DOUGLAS CRAIGEN)
Subject: Re: Canadian Culture Shock?
Organization: Acadia University
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1992 17:17:10 GMT

In article <1992Dec21.150048.9606@alchemy.chem.utoronto.ca> mbrownel@alchemy.chem.utoronto.ca (Mark Brownell) writes:
>
>Laurence writes...
>
>>Indeed it would be a shock if any (culture) were in evidence in canada.
>
>
>Hey Laurence, just what is your problem? If you think Canada's so damn
>boring why are you reading soc.culture.canada? And why flame twice? Was
>it because everybody ignored your first flame?
>
>Okay, I'll play your stupid little game - Here goes...
>
>....Stuff deleted

   The only thing that makes Canada boring is arguments such as those that 
go on with Laurence Godfrey in this group.  As far as our culture goes, if 
you think that culture has to be homogeneous and old then we don't have any 
culture.  Just look at who we are being compared to by those who claim we 
have no culture.  England perhaps?  I had the dubious chance while in 
England to sit in on a debate between a man and his Irish wife after they 
had both had a bit to drink.  She got into ripping apart english culture:  
"all that happens here is the blokes spend their whole life at the pub with 
their mates playing darts!  It is the dullest place I've ever seen!  You 
call that culture?  Culture consists of centuries worth of literature, 
dance, music..."  The guy in reply: "so if we put on silly looking clothes 
and have everybody dance exactly the same dance to old music that nobody 
really likes anyways, then and only then do we have culture?"   And the 
arguement went on and on (they were divorced a few months later).
    
    This group would be a lot more interesting to read if the likes of 
Godfrey were simply ignored (or at most lightly ridiculed).  Arguing with 
him makes about as much sense as joining into the argument summarized 
above.  My suspicion is that he recognizes that there is nowhere on earth 
with the diversity of geography, language, literature, lifestyle, 
viewpoint... that we enjoy here.  He has simply discovered an amusing 
passtime in baiting those who take him seriously.


===================================================================
  Doug Craigen, Department of Physics, Acadia University,
  Wolfville, N.S., B0P 1X0, (902) 542 - 2201 x150

  FOR RENT - signature file space
             (reasonable rates)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.canada
From: golchowy@alchemy.chem.utoronto.ca (Gerald Olchowy)
Subject: Re: Happy New Year
Organization: University of Toronto Chemistry Department
Date: Sun, 3 Jan 1993 07:32:38 GMT

In article <2J3qwB3w165w@ersys.edmonton.ab.ca> yadallee@ersys.edmonton.ab.ca (Dave Shariff Yadallee) writes:
>ramirez@julia.math.ucla.edu (Alice Ramirez) writes:
>
>- Just want to wish a happy new year to all my Canadian friends.
>-
>- May you get rid of Mulrooney
>- May your one-dollars be made of paper once again.
>-
>
>Also, a purging of the GST IS on my mind.
>

What would you replace it with...there is the small matter of
where the $20 billion dollars the GST raises is going to come from.

Gerald
Newsgroups: soc.culture.canada,can.politics
From: mon@cray.com (Muriel Nelson)
Subject: Re: Abortion, Caves, Galen (WAS Vegetarianism and abortion)
Date: 30 Dec 92 11:56:14 CST

In article <1992Dec30.011604.3456@cbfsb.cb.att.com> motto@cbnewsf.cb.att.com (mary.rita.otto) writes:
>In article <1992Dec20.063535.19448@cdf.toronto.edu> g9rwaigh@cdf.toronto.edu (Rosemary Waigh) writes:
>>In article <1992Dec20.043628.3553@bmerh85.bnr.ca> nadeau@bnr.ca (Rheal Nadeau) writes:
>>>Not far from my home town (we're talking small town, here!), a pregnant
>>>woman, in the final stages of pregnancy, was diagnosed as carrying a
>>>hypercephalic child - literally, big-headed.  The child could not
>>>survive, and the birth would have killed the mother.  (Caesarians, in
>>>those days, were much more drastic procedures than now.)  The doctors
>                             ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>And cutting up a full term baby ISN'T a drastic procedure?
>This has the ring of folklore about it rather than truth.
>>>chose to abort - to cut up the child within the womb and extract it
>>>piece by piece.
>>Rosemary Waigh             Undergraduate, Computer Science / Linguistics
>
>Ro,
>I've come to expect better analysis than this from you.
>Mary

Mary,

Such things were not all that uncommon only a couple
of generations ago.  There are still rural areas where
a C-section could not be obtained in time to save either
mother or fetus if such a woman went into labor before
the problem was detected.  There are also women who have
such procedures done because the chances of them surviving
surgery are very small.  I agree that cutting up a full-
term fetus is extremely drastic, but it was once the
case that the only other choice was often to simply watch
the woman die in agony, and then cut her open on the
chance that the fetus might survive.  Any text on midwifery
written before 1920 would probably provide you with some
enlightenment on this subject.

muriel
standard disclaimer
Newsgroups: soc.culture.canada,talk.abortion,talk.politics.animals
From: mon@cray.com (Muriel Nelson)
Subject: Re: Abortion, Caves, Galen (WAS Vegetarianism and abortion)
Date: 21 Dec 92 11:49:16 CST

In article <1992Dec19.164006.27083@csi.uottawa.ca> cbbrowne@csi.uottawa.ca (Christopher Browne) writes:
>
>Based on that "detailed" post on the dangers and evils of pregnancy,
>am I to infer that it should be presumed that giving birth is an
>extreme danger to women and should be outlawed?
>
All we're asking is to keep the freedom to choose
how much risk we take on.

>It is unfortunate that pregnancy is a difficult experience; there are
>not at this time any alternative methods of human gestation to prevent
>such difficulty.  And I'm sure that there would be some heavy outcry
>against such "alternative methods" if they ever do come.
>
Don't be so sure about that.

>Based on the listing of difficulties, and the seemingly high
>expectation of death or other personally destructive events, it's
>surprising that the world population ever got up to the level it's at.
>There certainly should be more deaths in childbirth in North America
>than I've heard of; I've known quite a lot of mothers over the years.
>None of them ever died in childbirth.
>
The last time this question came up I pointed out that
my aunt died in chilbirth.  I received several emails
from others who have lost family members in this way.

Though death from childbirth is a statistically small
percentage of women who give birth, it is a real risk,
and the women who die in this way are missed by those
they leave behind.   I'm sure your sardonic comments
have opened a few old wounds for people you've never
met.  To any of you who are reading here, please know
that some of us empathize with your loss.

muriel
standard disclaimer
Newsgroups: soc.culture.canada,can.politics,talk.abortion,talk.politics.animals
From: dsholtsi@csl36h.csl.ncsu.edu (Doug Holtsinger)
Subject: Re: Abortion, Caves, Galen (WAS Vegetarianism and abortion)
Followup-To: talk.abortion,can.politics
Reply-To: dsholtsi@csl36h.csl.ncsu.edu (Doug Holtsinger)
Organization: North Carolina State University
Date: Sat, 26 Dec 1992 19:28:58 GMT

In article <1992Dec24.180123.18424@informix.com> 
proberts@informix.com (Paul Roberts) writes:

> This argument ("I am against abortion because had my parents chosen it,
> I wouldn't be alive at all") would seem to apply equally well to
> contraception. 

Using your reasoning, the argument would apply equally well
to infanticide.  And to killing persons in a coma.  And to
killing persons while they are asleep.
From: kaldis@romulus.rutgers.edu (Theodore A. Kaldis)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.canada
Subject: Re: Pro British is not anti French (Was: Legalized ...)
Date: 26 Dec 92 04:30:05 GMT
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.

In article <1992Dec22.175553.1@uwovax.uwo.ca> 4224_5201@uwovax.uwo.ca (John LaRocque) writes:

> Hey, how come their Stop signs say STOP and Quebec's say ARRET.  Who
> is more French anyways ...

Because Rene Levecque (sp?) wasn't from France.
-- 
The views expressed herein are my   ||  Theodore A. Kaldis
my own only.  Do you seriously      ||  kaldis@remus.rutgers.edu
believe that a major university as  ||  {...}!rutgers!remus.rutgers.edu!kaldis
this would hold such views???       ||
Newsgroups: soc.culture.canada,can.politics