Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Global Warming - a Liberal Scam?, (was Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers)
On Thu, 04 Dec 03 10:09:39 GMT, lparker@NOSPAMemory.edu (Lloyd Parker)
wrote:
>What does that mean? There are plenty of innovations. Airbus now is outdoing
>Boeing in orders, for example. Why? Innovative ideas.
Sure.
Like Britain, France & Germany giving economic incentives (money) to
their airlines to buy Airbus.
That's on top of the economic incentives those governments gave to
Airbus (subsidies) to help Airbus products.
Boeing doesn't get such help. They have to sell their products on
merit.
--
Bill Funk
replace "g" with "a"
wrote:
>What does that mean? There are plenty of innovations. Airbus now is outdoing
>Boeing in orders, for example. Why? Innovative ideas.
Sure.
Like Britain, France & Germany giving economic incentives (money) to
their airlines to buy Airbus.
That's on top of the economic incentives those governments gave to
Airbus (subsidies) to help Airbus products.
Boeing doesn't get such help. They have to sell their products on
merit.
--
Bill Funk
replace "g" with "a"
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Global Warming - a Liberal Scam?, (was Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers)
On Thu, 04 Dec 03 10:09:39 GMT, lparker@NOSPAMemory.edu (Lloyd Parker)
wrote:
>What does that mean? There are plenty of innovations. Airbus now is outdoing
>Boeing in orders, for example. Why? Innovative ideas.
Sure.
Like Britain, France & Germany giving economic incentives (money) to
their airlines to buy Airbus.
That's on top of the economic incentives those governments gave to
Airbus (subsidies) to help Airbus products.
Boeing doesn't get such help. They have to sell their products on
merit.
--
Bill Funk
replace "g" with "a"
wrote:
>What does that mean? There are plenty of innovations. Airbus now is outdoing
>Boeing in orders, for example. Why? Innovative ideas.
Sure.
Like Britain, France & Germany giving economic incentives (money) to
their airlines to buy Airbus.
That's on top of the economic incentives those governments gave to
Airbus (subsidies) to help Airbus products.
Boeing doesn't get such help. They have to sell their products on
merit.
--
Bill Funk
replace "g" with "a"
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Global Warming - a Liberal Scam?, (was Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers)
On Thu, 04 Dec 03 10:09:39 GMT, lparker@NOSPAMemory.edu (Lloyd Parker)
wrote:
>What does that mean? There are plenty of innovations. Airbus now is outdoing
>Boeing in orders, for example. Why? Innovative ideas.
Sure.
Like Britain, France & Germany giving economic incentives (money) to
their airlines to buy Airbus.
That's on top of the economic incentives those governments gave to
Airbus (subsidies) to help Airbus products.
Boeing doesn't get such help. They have to sell their products on
merit.
--
Bill Funk
replace "g" with "a"
wrote:
>What does that mean? There are plenty of innovations. Airbus now is outdoing
>Boeing in orders, for example. Why? Innovative ideas.
Sure.
Like Britain, France & Germany giving economic incentives (money) to
their airlines to buy Airbus.
That's on top of the economic incentives those governments gave to
Airbus (subsidies) to help Airbus products.
Boeing doesn't get such help. They have to sell their products on
merit.
--
Bill Funk
replace "g" with "a"
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Global Warming - a Liberal Scam?, (was Huge study aboutsafetycanbemisinterpreted by SUV drivers)
Lloyd Parker wrote:
>
> In article <3FCE1FB6.1C053487@mindspring.com>,
> "C. E. White" <cewhite3@mindspring.com> wrote:
> >And? Why is it that some groups (psudeo-liberals is my term for them) always
> what
> >to create laws they like out of thin air through judicial action and ignore
> >legitimate ,if distasteful, laws because they don't like them. There is a
> process
> >for adding and removing laws. If insisting that these procedures be followed
> >makes me a conservative, then I guess I am guilty. Unfortunately, most of the
> >people I know who claim to be conservatives don't agree with many of my
> ideas, so
> >I guess I am lost in the wilderness.
> >
> >Ed
> >
> How is letting people do what they want in the privacy of their home with
> another consenting adult "creating laws"? That's something any conservative
> or libertarian should want the government to stay out of.
Heard a story on the radio today about a gentleman in Germany who
advertises for people to volunteer to be tied to a slab or bed or
something and slowly cut to death with a knife and literally eaten piece
by piece - apparently some sexual thrill involved. He has killed at
least one volunteer that way and video taped it while the volunteer kept
encouraging him to keep cuttin' and eatin' - some others he cut loose
and let go when they changed their minds in the middle of the process -
what a kind man. They say the man has no problem getting volunteers for
it- there's apparently a couple hundred or more that chat regularly on
the internet about it and there's a waiting list. So i guess it's OK
because it's two consenting adults in the privacy of one of their
homes. Didn't know you were such an absolute libertarian, Parker.
Bill Putney
(to reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
address with "x")
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Global Warming - a Liberal Scam?, (was Huge study aboutsafetycanbemisinterpreted by SUV drivers)
Lloyd Parker wrote:
>
> In article <3FCE1FB6.1C053487@mindspring.com>,
> "C. E. White" <cewhite3@mindspring.com> wrote:
> >And? Why is it that some groups (psudeo-liberals is my term for them) always
> what
> >to create laws they like out of thin air through judicial action and ignore
> >legitimate ,if distasteful, laws because they don't like them. There is a
> process
> >for adding and removing laws. If insisting that these procedures be followed
> >makes me a conservative, then I guess I am guilty. Unfortunately, most of the
> >people I know who claim to be conservatives don't agree with many of my
> ideas, so
> >I guess I am lost in the wilderness.
> >
> >Ed
> >
> How is letting people do what they want in the privacy of their home with
> another consenting adult "creating laws"? That's something any conservative
> or libertarian should want the government to stay out of.
Heard a story on the radio today about a gentleman in Germany who
advertises for people to volunteer to be tied to a slab or bed or
something and slowly cut to death with a knife and literally eaten piece
by piece - apparently some sexual thrill involved. He has killed at
least one volunteer that way and video taped it while the volunteer kept
encouraging him to keep cuttin' and eatin' - some others he cut loose
and let go when they changed their minds in the middle of the process -
what a kind man. They say the man has no problem getting volunteers for
it- there's apparently a couple hundred or more that chat regularly on
the internet about it and there's a waiting list. So i guess it's OK
because it's two consenting adults in the privacy of one of their
homes. Didn't know you were such an absolute libertarian, Parker.
Bill Putney
(to reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
address with "x")
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Global Warming - a Liberal Scam?, (was Huge study aboutsafetycanbemisinterpreted by SUV drivers)
Lloyd Parker wrote:
>
> In article <3FCE1FB6.1C053487@mindspring.com>,
> "C. E. White" <cewhite3@mindspring.com> wrote:
> >And? Why is it that some groups (psudeo-liberals is my term for them) always
> what
> >to create laws they like out of thin air through judicial action and ignore
> >legitimate ,if distasteful, laws because they don't like them. There is a
> process
> >for adding and removing laws. If insisting that these procedures be followed
> >makes me a conservative, then I guess I am guilty. Unfortunately, most of the
> >people I know who claim to be conservatives don't agree with many of my
> ideas, so
> >I guess I am lost in the wilderness.
> >
> >Ed
> >
> How is letting people do what they want in the privacy of their home with
> another consenting adult "creating laws"? That's something any conservative
> or libertarian should want the government to stay out of.
Heard a story on the radio today about a gentleman in Germany who
advertises for people to volunteer to be tied to a slab or bed or
something and slowly cut to death with a knife and literally eaten piece
by piece - apparently some sexual thrill involved. He has killed at
least one volunteer that way and video taped it while the volunteer kept
encouraging him to keep cuttin' and eatin' - some others he cut loose
and let go when they changed their minds in the middle of the process -
what a kind man. They say the man has no problem getting volunteers for
it- there's apparently a couple hundred or more that chat regularly on
the internet about it and there's a waiting list. So i guess it's OK
because it's two consenting adults in the privacy of one of their
homes. Didn't know you were such an absolute libertarian, Parker.
Bill Putney
(to reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
address with "x")
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Global Warming - a Liberal Scam?, (was Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers)
On Thu, 04 Dec 03 10:09:39 GMT, lparker@NOSPAMemory.edu (Lloyd Parker)
wrote:
>Besides, if the gov't pays for health care instead of the employer, that's
>reducing the costs to the employer.
I guess taxes don't count as a cost.
--
Bill Funk
replace "g" with "a"
wrote:
>Besides, if the gov't pays for health care instead of the employer, that's
>reducing the costs to the employer.
I guess taxes don't count as a cost.
--
Bill Funk
replace "g" with "a"
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Global Warming - a Liberal Scam?, (was Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers)
On Thu, 04 Dec 03 10:09:39 GMT, lparker@NOSPAMemory.edu (Lloyd Parker)
wrote:
>Besides, if the gov't pays for health care instead of the employer, that's
>reducing the costs to the employer.
I guess taxes don't count as a cost.
--
Bill Funk
replace "g" with "a"
wrote:
>Besides, if the gov't pays for health care instead of the employer, that's
>reducing the costs to the employer.
I guess taxes don't count as a cost.
--
Bill Funk
replace "g" with "a"
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Global Warming - a Liberal Scam?, (was Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers)
On Thu, 04 Dec 03 10:09:39 GMT, lparker@NOSPAMemory.edu (Lloyd Parker)
wrote:
>Besides, if the gov't pays for health care instead of the employer, that's
>reducing the costs to the employer.
I guess taxes don't count as a cost.
--
Bill Funk
replace "g" with "a"
wrote:
>Besides, if the gov't pays for health care instead of the employer, that's
>reducing the costs to the employer.
I guess taxes don't count as a cost.
--
Bill Funk
replace "g" with "a"
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Global Warming - a Liberal Scam?, (was Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers)
On Thu, 04 Dec 03 10:04:32 GMT, lparker@NOSPAMemory.edu (Lloyd Parker)
wrote:
>In article <3fce1e95.263879672@news.mi.comcast.giganews.com >,
> mielkman@excite.com (John Mielke) wrote:
>>On Wed, 03 Dec 03 10:54:53 GMT, lparker@NOSPAMemory.edu (Lloyd Parker)
>>wrote:
>>
>>>In article <2c7qsvgrtldnv0d50g0u57c2j0cadcc7if@4ax.com>,
>>> Bill Funk <bfunk33@pipping.com> wrote:
>>>>On Tue, 02 Dec 03 15:37:02 GMT, lparker@NOSPAMemory.edu (Lloyd Parker)
>>>>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>In article <Us5zb.282500$275.1000782@attbi_s53>,
>>>>> tetraethyllead@yahoo.com (Brent P) wrote:
>>>>>>In article <bqinb6$him$8@puck.cc.emory.edu>, Lloyd Parker wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Yeah, it'd be terrible if everybody were covered and we spent less on
>>>>>health
>>>>>>> care, as Europe, Canada, and Japan do, wouldn't it? Terrible for
>>>insurance
>>>>>>> companies, drug companies, HMOs, etc, that is.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>How would we spend "less on health care" ? Instead of paying for health
>>>>>>insurance we would pay *AT LEAST* that much in additional taxes.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>Why is it, then, that every western European nation, plus Canada and
>Japan,
>>>>>spend less per capita on health care than the US yet still cover
>everybody?
>>>>
>>>>Lloyd, you might want to do a Google search on the keywords:
>>>>canadian health care problems
>>>>This would let you see reality instead of the utopia your liberal
>>>>friends promise.
>>>>
>>>
>>>Oh great, he wants me to absorb his right-wing propaganda.
>>>
>>>Try this:
>>>
>>>http://www-2.cs.cmu.edu/afs/cs.cmu.e...cs/HealthCare/
>Co
>>>nsumerReports-Sep92.html.gz#Does%20Canada%20Have%20The%20Answer?
>>
>>
>>So now a simple google search is "right-wing propaganda"? Every one
>>of 2,280,000 pages is right wing? No wonder people have such a low
>>opinion of you.
>
>If you cite right-web web sites, and medical-insurance-drug industry sites,
>then, yes, they're propaganda. Consumer Reports analyzed the health care
>situation from a consumer's point of view.
I didn't cite anything.
I simply advised you to do a Google search.
You really need to stop seeing yourself as being persecuted. Reality
would be a nice change. Do you really think Google is dominated by
right-wingers?
--
Bill Funk
replace "g" with "a"
wrote:
>In article <3fce1e95.263879672@news.mi.comcast.giganews.com >,
> mielkman@excite.com (John Mielke) wrote:
>>On Wed, 03 Dec 03 10:54:53 GMT, lparker@NOSPAMemory.edu (Lloyd Parker)
>>wrote:
>>
>>>In article <2c7qsvgrtldnv0d50g0u57c2j0cadcc7if@4ax.com>,
>>> Bill Funk <bfunk33@pipping.com> wrote:
>>>>On Tue, 02 Dec 03 15:37:02 GMT, lparker@NOSPAMemory.edu (Lloyd Parker)
>>>>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>In article <Us5zb.282500$275.1000782@attbi_s53>,
>>>>> tetraethyllead@yahoo.com (Brent P) wrote:
>>>>>>In article <bqinb6$him$8@puck.cc.emory.edu>, Lloyd Parker wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Yeah, it'd be terrible if everybody were covered and we spent less on
>>>>>health
>>>>>>> care, as Europe, Canada, and Japan do, wouldn't it? Terrible for
>>>insurance
>>>>>>> companies, drug companies, HMOs, etc, that is.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>How would we spend "less on health care" ? Instead of paying for health
>>>>>>insurance we would pay *AT LEAST* that much in additional taxes.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>Why is it, then, that every western European nation, plus Canada and
>Japan,
>>>>>spend less per capita on health care than the US yet still cover
>everybody?
>>>>
>>>>Lloyd, you might want to do a Google search on the keywords:
>>>>canadian health care problems
>>>>This would let you see reality instead of the utopia your liberal
>>>>friends promise.
>>>>
>>>
>>>Oh great, he wants me to absorb his right-wing propaganda.
>>>
>>>Try this:
>>>
>>>http://www-2.cs.cmu.edu/afs/cs.cmu.e...cs/HealthCare/
>Co
>>>nsumerReports-Sep92.html.gz#Does%20Canada%20Have%20The%20Answer?
>>
>>
>>So now a simple google search is "right-wing propaganda"? Every one
>>of 2,280,000 pages is right wing? No wonder people have such a low
>>opinion of you.
>
>If you cite right-web web sites, and medical-insurance-drug industry sites,
>then, yes, they're propaganda. Consumer Reports analyzed the health care
>situation from a consumer's point of view.
I didn't cite anything.
I simply advised you to do a Google search.
You really need to stop seeing yourself as being persecuted. Reality
would be a nice change. Do you really think Google is dominated by
right-wingers?
--
Bill Funk
replace "g" with "a"