On Sun, 31 Oct 2010 19:43:43 -0400, wrote:

On Sun, 31 Oct 2010 12:25:00 -0700, wrote:

On Sun, 31 Oct 2010 12:52:32 -0400, wrote:


By your standards I am poor but I also think taxes are too low right
now. Certainly I don't want to send any more money to Washington but
they will spend the money anyway.
It is better not to foist it on our kids.

Huh? This nonsense about the deficit is out of control. Sure, it's a
problem, but certainly not a fatal one.

The government is borrowing 40 cents of every dollar it spends with
nothing but higher deficits in sight and you don't think it is a
problem?

For the short-term. No. It's a necessary evil. For the long-term. Yes.

The Nobel Prize has very little to do with the average worker. I bet
99% of them can't even name more than one current prize winner in any
category.

Again, this has nothing to do with your original claim. Sounds
anti-intellectual to me.


You are the one who seemed to be saying nobel prizes translate to
jobs.,

Where? I never said that nor implied it.

It has been the best business model for the last 2 decades.
Walmart is the nations most successful retailer, McDonalds is the most
successful restaurant and most of our electronics come from China.

Ummm... 2 decades is a pretty short time frame.


Do you see the trend changing?

For next year? No. For another two decades, it's too early to tell.

Maybe you want to rephrase.
The fact is, the first company to actually produce that mythical
dollar a watt solar collector is going to rule the world. That is
about where solar actually starts to make sense.

http://www.popularmechanics.com/scie...r-wind/4306443

I guess we're the ruling country.

Let's see if they can deliver that panel for a buck,

It's your claim that producing a panel for that cost is a ruling
event.


If they can actually bring this to market for a buck a watt with a
reasonable life expectancy, it will be a game changer.
Mechanix Illustrated is famous for writing stories about things that
din't actually happen.

Well, I'm just point out that your bar has been reached... at least
according to what you said.

Cheaper isn't always better. Example: McDs. And, it's not even clear
that cheaper is actually cheaper in the long run.


Humm, lets see.
Ruth's Chris Steak house stock was $20 in 2007 it is $5 now
McDonalds was $40 in 2007 it is $70 now.
Maybe cheaper is better.

As long as you don't factor in health...

I doubt there is much difference between a steak and a burger, health
wise.

It's all about fat content. Pick the right steak and the wrong burger
(e.g., McDs) and there's a big difference.

The steak at Ruth's will have a lot higher fat content than a McD
hamburger.
That is what USDA prime means, more fat. (AKA "marbling")

http://www.weightlossforall.com/mcdo...ories-list.htm
http://www.weightlossforall.com/fat-content-beef.htm


Yet Bob says those were the last days that the middle class actually
got a raise. (pre 1973)

I don't know what Bob said.

He said just what I said. The US Middle Class has not had a raise
since 1973 ... and he said it 30 times or more here.

Take it up with Bob. I am not his savior.

It is a statistic that is all over liberal TV, I know you have heard
it.

A statistic? There are lies, damn lies, and statistics.

I know you liberals are fast and loose with statistics. Bob was
quoting Andrew Sullivan.

I'm not a liberal except socially. Andrew Sullivan isn't a liberal.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_Sullivan


Who wrote that Wiki?
Sullivan is a gay writer for Atlantic Monthly, formerly from the New
Republic. How conservative can he be? Libertarian may be a better
description.

You claimed he's a liberal. He and others claim he isn't. To answer
you question, many people, and it's been vetted by many people. I
don't see any dispute in the article header and there are lots of
references. Feel free to discount all that.

On Sun, 31 Oct 2010 21:03:56 -0700, wrote:

I
don't see any dispute in the article header and there are lots of
references. Feel free to discount all that.

Allow me to suggest that his might be a topic better discussed in an
EMAIL exchange than in a boating group.

On Mon, 01 Nov 2010 00:55:11 -0400, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Sun, 31 Oct 2010 21:03:56 -0700, wrote:

I
don't see any dispute in the article header and there are lots of
references. Feel free to discount all that.

Allow me to suggest that his might be a topic better discussed in an
EMAIL exchange than in a boating group.

Allow me to suggest that you're not the group monitor. Greg and I were
having a conversation. If you don't like it, stay out of it.

Oh, and get off my back. I haven't done anything approaching what
others have done.

wrote in message ...
On Mon, 01 Nov 2010 00:55:11 -0400, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Sun, 31 Oct 2010 21:03:56 -0700, wrote:

I
don't see any dispute in the article header and there are lots of
references. Feel free to discount all that.

Allow me to suggest that his might be a topic better discussed in an
EMAIL exchange than in a boating group.

Allow me to suggest that you're not the group monitor. Greg and I were
having a conversation. If you don't like it, stay out of it.

Oh, and get off my back. I haven't done anything approaching what
others have done.


We are all the group monitor, dearie. If you want to keep your pillow talk with greg private, this aint the place.

--

Z

"Harry®" wrote in message
...
wrote in message
...
On Mon, 01 Nov 2010 00:55:11 -0400, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Sun, 31 Oct 2010 21:03:56 -0700, wrote:

I
don't see any dispute in the article header and there are lots of
references. Feel free to discount all that.

Allow me to suggest that his might be a topic better discussed in an
EMAIL exchange than in a boating group.

Allow me to suggest that you're not the group monitor. Greg and I were
having a conversation. If you don't like it, stay out of it.

Oh, and get off my back. I haven't done anything approaching what
others have done.


We are all the group monitor, dearie. If you want to keep your pillow talk
with greg private, this aint the place.


Just can't stop the spoofing , eh?

On Mon, 1 Nov 2010 09:57:49 -0300, "YukonBound"
wrote:



"Harry®" wrote in message
...
wrote in message
...
On Mon, 01 Nov 2010 00:55:11 -0400, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Sun, 31 Oct 2010 21:03:56 -0700, wrote:

I
don't see any dispute in the article header and there are lots of
references. Feel free to discount all that.

Allow me to suggest that his might be a topic better discussed in an
EMAIL exchange than in a boating group.

Allow me to suggest that you're not the group monitor. Greg and I were
having a conversation. If you don't like it, stay out of it.

Oh, and get off my back. I haven't done anything approaching what
others have done.


We are all the group monitor, dearie. If you want to keep your pillow talk
with greg private, this aint the place.


Just can't stop the spoofing , eh?

I don't see the hall monitor jumping on his bs... do you?

wrote in message
...
On Mon, 1 Nov 2010 09:57:49 -0300, "YukonBound"
wrote:



"Harry®" wrote in message
...
wrote in message
...
On Mon, 01 Nov 2010 00:55:11 -0400, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Sun, 31 Oct 2010 21:03:56 -0700, wrote:

I
don't see any dispute in the article header and there are lots of
references. Feel free to discount all that.

Allow me to suggest that his might be a topic better discussed in an
EMAIL exchange than in a boating group.

Allow me to suggest that you're not the group monitor. Greg and I were
having a conversation. If you don't like it, stay out of it.

Oh, and get off my back. I haven't done anything approaching what
others have done.


We are all the group monitor, dearie. If you want to keep your pillow
talk
with greg private, this aint the place.


Just can't stop the spoofing , eh?

I don't see the hall monitor jumping on his bs... do you?

I think they call that 'selective hearing'.

"YukonBound" wrote in message ...


"Harry®" wrote in message
...
wrote in message
...
On Mon, 01 Nov 2010 00:55:11 -0400, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Sun, 31 Oct 2010 21:03:56 -0700, wrote:

I
don't see any dispute in the article header and there are lots of
references. Feel free to discount all that.

Allow me to suggest that his might be a topic better discussed in an
EMAIL exchange than in a boating group.

Allow me to suggest that you're not the group monitor. Greg and I were
having a conversation. If you don't like it, stay out of it.

Oh, and get off my back. I haven't done anything approaching what
others have done.


We are all the group monitor, dearie. If you want to keep your pillow talk
with greg private, this aint the place.


Just can't stop the spoofing , eh?


That one slipped out. I am in the process of changing over to my new identity.


--
Ziggy

On 11/1/10 3:34 PM, Ziggy® wrote:
wrote in message ...


wrote in message
...
wrote in message
...
On Mon, 01 Nov 2010 00:55:11 -0400, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Sun, 31 Oct 2010 21:03:56 -0700, wrote:

I
don't see any dispute in the article header and there are lots of
references. Feel free to discount all that.

Allow me to suggest that his might be a topic better discussed in an
EMAIL exchange than in a boating group.

Allow me to suggest that you're not the group monitor. Greg and I were
having a conversation. If you don't like it, stay out of it.

Oh, and get off my back. I haven't done anything approaching what
others have done.


We are all the group monitor, dearie. If you want to keep your pillow talk
with greg private, this aint the place.


Just can't stop the spoofing , eh?


That one slipped out. I am in the process of changing over to my new identity.



If you are having an identity crisis, you can always go back to using
flajim.

On Sun, 31 Oct 2010 22:42:58 -0700, wrote:

Allow me to suggest that you're not the group monitor. Greg and I were
having a conversation. If you don't like it, stay out of it.

Oh, and get off my back. I haven't done anything approaching what
others have done.

You and Greg should take the conversation off line before it incites a
political food fight. That's what we are *all* trying to avoid. It
has happened way too many times in the past.