Three Body Problem

[BCFD 36]

Awhile back, The Three Body Problem was mentioned. In that thread, there
was no mention of the current Netflix version. Was this mentioned
somewhere else and I just missed it? Google groups is of no help any more.

I have just started the series and I am intrigued, so far. Just two
episodes. My wife is rather "meh" about it, but she said the same thing
about Star Trek 1 which in reality she HATED so I may be watching it
after she goes to bed.

----------------

Dave Scruggs
Senior Software Engineer - Lockheed Martin, et. al (mostly Retired)
Captain - Boulder Creek Fire (Retired)
Board of Directors - Boulder Creek Fire Protection District (What was I
thinking?)

[Lynn McGuire]

On 8/16/2024 1:26 PM, BCFD 36 wrote:
> Awhile back, The Three Body Problem was mentioned. In that thread, there
> was no mention of the current Netflix version. Was this mentioned
> somewhere else and I just missed it? Google groups is of no help any more.
>
> I have just started the series and I am intrigued, so far. Just two
> episodes. My wife is rather "meh" about it, but she said the same thing
> about Star Trek 1 which in reality she HATED so I may be watching it
> after she goes to bed.
>
> ----------------
>
> Dave Scruggs
> Senior Software Engineer - Lockheed Martin, et. al (mostly Retired)
> Captain - Boulder Creek Fire (Retired)
> Board of Directors - Boulder Creek Fire Protection District (What was I
> thinking?)

I did not like the Netflix version, have yet to read the book. Too much
time spent on the China Cultural Revolution and their violence against
the educated. Felt like a Children of the Corn mini series. I gave up
after two episodes.

Lynn

[William Hyde]

Lynn McGuire wrote:
> On 8/16/2024 1:26 PM, BCFD 36 wrote:
>> Awhile back, The Three Body Problem was mentioned. In that thread,
>> there was no mention of the current Netflix version. Was this
>> mentioned somewhere else and I just missed it? Google groups is of no
>> help any more.
>>
>> I have just started the series and I am intrigued, so far. Just two
>> episodes. My wife is rather "meh" about it, but she said the same
>> thing about Star Trek 1 which in reality she HATED so I may be
>> watching it after she goes to bed.
>>
>> ----------------
>>
>> Dave Scruggs
>> Senior Software Engineer - Lockheed Martin, et. al (mostly Retired)
>> Captain - Boulder Creek Fire (Retired)
>> Board of Directors - Boulder Creek Fire Protection District (What was
>> I thinking?)
>
> I did not like the Netflix version, have yet to read the book.  Too much
> time spent on the China Cultural Revolution and their violence against
> the educated.  Felt like a Children of the Corn mini series.  I gave up
> after two episodes.

I've known several people whose lives were damaged by that event. And
these were the lucky ones, who made it to the west.
>

One scientist I knew never got over it, especially the abuse suffered by
her mother. One might have expected her father, an educated man who had
lived in the West and still had children living there to be as big a
target. But he was left alone, she said, because he was a renowned
gerontologist and the Party leadership was getting older.


Another distinguished scientist told me he reached the last year of
secondary education only to realize that he'd learned absolutely nothing
owing to the constant meetings and demonstrations. Ignoring his
teachers, he packed four years of school into one. Judging by his
subsequent career, he kept up that level of effort for the next few
decades.


William Hyde

[Lynn McGuire]

On 8/16/2024 4:55 PM, William Hyde wrote:
> Lynn McGuire wrote:
>> On 8/16/2024 1:26 PM, BCFD 36 wrote:
>>> Awhile back, The Three Body Problem was mentioned. In that thread,
>>> there was no mention of the current Netflix version. Was this
>>> mentioned somewhere else and I just missed it? Google groups is of no
>>> help any more.
>>>
>>> I have just started the series and I am intrigued, so far. Just two
>>> episodes. My wife is rather "meh" about it, but she said the same
>>> thing about Star Trek 1 which in reality she HATED so I may be
>>> watching it after she goes to bed.
>>>
>>> ----------------
>>>
>>> Dave Scruggs
>>> Senior Software Engineer - Lockheed Martin, et. al (mostly Retired)
>>> Captain - Boulder Creek Fire (Retired)
>>> Board of Directors - Boulder Creek Fire Protection District (What was
>>> I thinking?)
>>
>> I did not like the Netflix version, have yet to read the book.  Too
>> much time spent on the China Cultural Revolution and their violence
>> against the educated.  Felt like a Children of the Corn mini series.
>> I gave up after two episodes.
>
> I've known several people whose lives were damaged by that event.  And
> these were the lucky ones, who made it to the west.
>>
>
> One scientist I knew never got over it, especially the abuse suffered by
> her mother.  One might have expected her father, an educated man who had
> lived in the West and still had children living there to be as big a
> target. But he was left alone, she said, because he was a renowned
> gerontologist and  the Party leadership was getting older.
>
>
> Another distinguished scientist told me he reached the last year of
> secondary education only to realize that he'd learned absolutely nothing
> owing to the constant meetings and demonstrations.  Ignoring his
> teachers, he packed four years of school into one.  Judging by his
> subsequent career, he kept up that level of effort for  the next few
> decades.
>
>
> William Hyde

One of my Dad's mainland Chinese grad students from OU lived with us for
a couple of years from 1973 to 1974 and worked for my Dad from 1973 to
1995. He came over to the USA in 1966 or 1967 and got a PhD in Chemical
Engineering from OU in 1973. I heard enough stories from him about
growing on a farm in China, living in a cave, starving all the time. If
our family did not eat everything at supper then he would finish
everything off. It took my mother several months break him of that
habit. But he never got fat. He never mentioned anything about the
Cultural Revolution but I suspect it was the reason why he left China.

He was incredibly smart, he would give me an algorithm and I would code
it up in Fortran 66 for him in a subroutine and give him the card deck.
He was very submissive, he would never look you in the face, would
always look down. He went back to mainland China in 1995 to help with
his sister's export business. Sadly, he soon had a heart attack and
passed away. His sister was kind enough to call my father and tell us.

I know several people in the USA who had to leave Iran when they had
their cultural revolution. Mostly engineers working for USA companies
like Dupont in Iran. I've gotten a few stories from them, grim, very
grim. One of my classmates at TAMU disappeared at the midyear of our
junior year in 1980 when the Iranian Embassy in the USA sent him a
letter cutting off his funds and ordering him to come home. They also
revoked his visa but President Reagan gave all those people green card
status in 1981. He refused to go home to Iran since he was a nephew of
the Shah, he figured that they would shoot him the minute he stepped off
the plane.

In other words, the various Cultural Revolutions are a little too real
for me and I do not enjoy reading about or viewing them.

Lynn

[D]

On Fri, 16 Aug 2024, Lynn McGuire wrote:

> On 8/16/2024 4:55 PM, William Hyde wrote:
>> Lynn McGuire wrote:
>>> On 8/16/2024 1:26 PM, BCFD 36 wrote:
>>>> Awhile back, The Three Body Problem was mentioned. In that thread, there
>>>> was no mention of the current Netflix version. Was this mentioned
>>>> somewhere else and I just missed it? Google groups is of no help any
>>>> more.
>>>>
>>>> I have just started the series and I am intrigued, so far. Just two
>>>> episodes. My wife is rather "meh" about it, but she said the same thing
>>>> about Star Trek 1 which in reality she HATED so I may be watching it
>>>> after she goes to bed.
>>>>
>>>> ----------------
>>>>
>>>> Dave Scruggs
>>>> Senior Software Engineer - Lockheed Martin, et. al (mostly Retired)
>>>> Captain - Boulder Creek Fire (Retired)
>>>> Board of Directors - Boulder Creek Fire Protection District (What was I
>>>> thinking?)
>>>
>>> I did not like the Netflix version, have yet to read the book.  Too much
>>> time spent on the China Cultural Revolution and their violence against the
>>> educated.  Felt like a Children of the Corn mini series. I gave up after
>>> two episodes.
>>
>> I've known several people whose lives were damaged by that event.  And
>> these were the lucky ones, who made it to the west.
>>>
>>
>> One scientist I knew never got over it, especially the abuse suffered by
>> her mother.  One might have expected her father, an educated man who had
>> lived in the West and still had children living there to be as big a
>> target. But he was left alone, she said, because he was a renowned
>> gerontologist and  the Party leadership was getting older.
>>
>>
>> Another distinguished scientist told me he reached the last year of
>> secondary education only to realize that he'd learned absolutely nothing
>> owing to the constant meetings and demonstrations.  Ignoring his teachers,
>> he packed four years of school into one.  Judging by his subsequent career,
>> he kept up that level of effort for  the next few decades.
>>
>>
>> William Hyde
>
> One of my Dad's mainland Chinese grad students from OU lived with us for a
> couple of years from 1973 to 1974 and worked for my Dad from 1973 to 1995.
> He came over to the USA in 1966 or 1967 and got a PhD in Chemical Engineering
> from OU in 1973. I heard enough stories from him about growing on a farm in
> China, living in a cave, starving all the time. If our family did not eat
> everything at supper then he would finish everything off. It took my mother
> several months break him of that habit. But he never got fat. He never
> mentioned anything about the Cultural Revolution but I suspect it was the
> reason why he left China.
>
> He was incredibly smart, he would give me an algorithm and I would code it up
> in Fortran 66 for him in a subroutine and give him the card deck. He was very
> submissive, he would never look you in the face, would always look down. He
> went back to mainland China in 1995 to help with his sister's export
> business. Sadly, he soon had a heart attack and passed away. His sister was
> kind enough to call my father and tell us.
>
> I know several people in the USA who had to leave Iran when they had their
> cultural revolution. Mostly engineers working for USA companies like Dupont
> in Iran. I've gotten a few stories from them, grim, very grim. One of my
> classmates at TAMU disappeared at the midyear of our junior year in 1980 when
> the Iranian Embassy in the USA sent him a letter cutting off his funds and
> ordering him to come home. They also revoked his visa but President Reagan
> gave all those people green card status in 1981. He refused to go home to
> Iran since he was a nephew of the Shah, he figured that they would shoot him
> the minute he stepped off the plane.
>
> In other words, the various Cultural Revolutions are a little too real for me
> and I do not enjoy reading about or viewing them.
>
> Lynn
>

With this historical luggage I can never understand how people in europe
can insist on voting for socialists. Give them enough power and they tend
to repeat themselves. Just look at the socialist UK government now
cracking down on free speech. Very sad.

[Lynn McGuire]

On 8/17/2024 4:51 AM, D wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, 16 Aug 2024, Lynn McGuire wrote:
>
>> On 8/16/2024 4:55 PM, William Hyde wrote:
>>> Lynn McGuire wrote:
>>>> On 8/16/2024 1:26 PM, BCFD 36 wrote:
>>>>> Awhile back, The Three Body Problem was mentioned. In that thread,
>>>>> there was no mention of the current Netflix version. Was this
>>>>> mentioned somewhere else and I just missed it? Google groups is of
>>>>> no help any more.
>>>>>
>>>>> I have just started the series and I am intrigued, so far. Just two
>>>>> episodes. My wife is rather "meh" about it, but she said the same
>>>>> thing about Star Trek 1 which in reality she HATED so I may be
>>>>> watching it after she goes to bed.
>>>>>
>>>>> ----------------
>>>>>
>>>>> Dave Scruggs
>>>>> Senior Software Engineer - Lockheed Martin, et. al (mostly Retired)
>>>>> Captain - Boulder Creek Fire (Retired)
>>>>> Board of Directors - Boulder Creek Fire Protection District (What
>>>>> was I thinking?)
>>>>
>>>> I did not like the Netflix version, have yet to read the book.  Too
>>>> much time spent on the China Cultural Revolution and their violence
>>>> against the educated.  Felt like a Children of the Corn mini
>>>> series.  I gave up after two episodes.
>>>
>>> I've known several people whose lives were damaged by that event.
>>> And these were the lucky ones, who made it to the west.
>>>>
>>>
>>> One scientist I knew never got over it, especially the abuse suffered
>>> by her mother.  One might have expected her father, an educated man
>>> who had lived in the West and still had children living there to be
>>> as big a target. But he was left alone, she said, because he was a
>>> renowned gerontologist and  the Party leadership was getting older.
>>>
>>>
>>> Another distinguished scientist told me he reached the last year of
>>> secondary education only to realize that he'd learned absolutely
>>> nothing owing to the constant meetings and demonstrations.  Ignoring
>>> his teachers, he packed four years of school into one.  Judging by
>>> his subsequent career, he kept up that level of effort for  the next
>>> few decades.
>>>
>>>
>>> William Hyde
>>
>> One of my Dad's mainland Chinese grad students from OU lived with us
>> for a couple of years from 1973 to 1974 and worked for my Dad from
>> 1973 to 1995. He came over to the USA in 1966 or 1967 and got a PhD in
>> Chemical Engineering from OU in 1973.  I heard enough stories from him
>> about growing on a farm in China, living in a cave, starving all the
>> time.  If our family did not eat everything at supper then he would
>> finish everything off.  It took my mother several months break him of
>> that habit.  But he never got fat.  He never mentioned anything about
>> the Cultural Revolution but I suspect it was the reason why he left
>> China.
>>
>> He was incredibly smart, he would give me an algorithm and I would
>> code it up in Fortran 66 for him in a subroutine and give him the card
>> deck. He was very submissive, he would never look you in the face,
>> would always look down.  He went back to mainland China in 1995 to
>> help with his sister's export business.  Sadly, he soon had a heart
>> attack and passed away.  His sister was kind enough to call my father
>> and tell us.
>>
>> I know several people in the USA who had to leave Iran when they had
>> their cultural revolution.  Mostly engineers working for USA companies
>> like Dupont in Iran.  I've gotten a few stories from them, grim, very
>> grim.  One of my classmates at TAMU disappeared at the midyear of our
>> junior year in 1980 when the Iranian Embassy in the USA sent him a
>> letter cutting off his funds and ordering him to come home.  They also
>> revoked his visa but President Reagan gave all those people green card
>> status in 1981.  He refused to go home to Iran since he was a nephew
>> of the Shah, he figured that they would shoot him the minute he
>> stepped off the plane.
>>
>> In other words, the various Cultural Revolutions are a little too real
>> for me and I do not enjoy reading about or viewing them.
>>
>> Lynn
>>
>
> With this historical luggage I can never understand how people in europe
> can insist on voting for socialists. Give them enough power and they
> tend to repeat themselves. Just look at the socialist UK government now
> cracking down on free speech. Very sad.

Incredibly sad. And the Democrat candidate here in the USA is talking
freezing food prices and making grocery stores report any changes in
their prices, causing huge paperwork and never ending bureaucracies.

Lynn

[D]

On Sat, 17 Aug 2024, Lynn McGuire wrote:

> On 8/17/2024 4:51 AM, D wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Fri, 16 Aug 2024, Lynn McGuire wrote:
>>
>>> On 8/16/2024 4:55 PM, William Hyde wrote:
>>>> Lynn McGuire wrote:
>>>>> On 8/16/2024 1:26 PM, BCFD 36 wrote:
>>>>>> Awhile back, The Three Body Problem was mentioned. In that thread,
>>>>>> there was no mention of the current Netflix version. Was this mentioned
>>>>>> somewhere else and I just missed it? Google groups is of no help any
>>>>>> more.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I have just started the series and I am intrigued, so far. Just two
>>>>>> episodes. My wife is rather "meh" about it, but she said the same thing
>>>>>> about Star Trek 1 which in reality she HATED so I may be watching it
>>>>>> after she goes to bed.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ----------------
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Dave Scruggs
>>>>>> Senior Software Engineer - Lockheed Martin, et. al (mostly Retired)
>>>>>> Captain - Boulder Creek Fire (Retired)
>>>>>> Board of Directors - Boulder Creek Fire Protection District (What was I
>>>>>> thinking?)
>>>>>
>>>>> I did not like the Netflix version, have yet to read the book.  Too much
>>>>> time spent on the China Cultural Revolution and their violence against
>>>>> the educated.  Felt like a Children of the Corn mini series.  I gave up
>>>>> after two episodes.
>>>>
>>>> I've known several people whose lives were damaged by that event. And
>>>> these were the lucky ones, who made it to the west.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> One scientist I knew never got over it, especially the abuse suffered by
>>>> her mother.  One might have expected her father, an educated man who had
>>>> lived in the West and still had children living there to be as big a
>>>> target. But he was left alone, she said, because he was a renowned
>>>> gerontologist and  the Party leadership was getting older.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Another distinguished scientist told me he reached the last year of
>>>> secondary education only to realize that he'd learned absolutely nothing
>>>> owing to the constant meetings and demonstrations.  Ignoring his
>>>> teachers, he packed four years of school into one.  Judging by his
>>>> subsequent career, he kept up that level of effort for  the next few
>>>> decades.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> William Hyde
>>>
>>> One of my Dad's mainland Chinese grad students from OU lived with us for a
>>> couple of years from 1973 to 1974 and worked for my Dad from 1973 to 1995.
>>> He came over to the USA in 1966 or 1967 and got a PhD in Chemical
>>> Engineering from OU in 1973.  I heard enough stories from him about
>>> growing on a farm in China, living in a cave, starving all the time.  If
>>> our family did not eat everything at supper then he would finish
>>> everything off.  It took my mother several months break him of that
>>> habit.  But he never got fat.  He never mentioned anything about the
>>> Cultural Revolution but I suspect it was the reason why he left China.
>>>
>>> He was incredibly smart, he would give me an algorithm and I would code it
>>> up in Fortran 66 for him in a subroutine and give him the card deck. He
>>> was very submissive, he would never look you in the face, would always
>>> look down.  He went back to mainland China in 1995 to help with his
>>> sister's export business.  Sadly, he soon had a heart attack and passed
>>> away.  His sister was kind enough to call my father and tell us.
>>>
>>> I know several people in the USA who had to leave Iran when they had their
>>> cultural revolution.  Mostly engineers working for USA companies like
>>> Dupont in Iran.  I've gotten a few stories from them, grim, very grim. 
>>> One of my classmates at TAMU disappeared at the midyear of our junior year
>>> in 1980 when the Iranian Embassy in the USA sent him a letter cutting off
>>> his funds and ordering him to come home.  They also revoked his visa but
>>> President Reagan gave all those people green card status in 1981.  He
>>> refused to go home to Iran since he was a nephew of the Shah, he figured
>>> that they would shoot him the minute he stepped off the plane.
>>>
>>> In other words, the various Cultural Revolutions are a little too real for
>>> me and I do not enjoy reading about or viewing them.
>>>
>>> Lynn
>>>
>>
>> With this historical luggage I can never understand how people in europe
>> can insist on voting for socialists. Give them enough power and they tend
>> to repeat themselves. Just look at the socialist UK government now cracking
>> down on free speech. Very sad.
>
> Incredibly sad. And the Democrat candidate here in the USA is talking
> freezing food prices and making grocery stores report any changes in their
> prices, causing huge paperwork and never ending bureaucracies.
>
> Lynn
>

What!?! Jesus Christ, do people never learn? When has freezing prices and
forcing markets under political control ever benefitted anyone except,
maybe, politicians?

Sounds like the US is up for a huge left torn in case Cackles wins. But
let's hope and pray that Trump wins. All else will be a huge disaster.

[Paul S Person]

On Sat, 17 Aug 2024 21:52:07 +0200, D <***@example.net> wrote:

>
>
>On Sat, 17 Aug 2024, Lynn McGuire wrote:
>
>> On 8/17/2024 4:51 AM, D wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, 16 Aug 2024, Lynn McGuire wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 8/16/2024 4:55 PM, William Hyde wrote:
>>>>> Lynn McGuire wrote:
>>>>>> On 8/16/2024 1:26 PM, BCFD 36 wrote:
>>>>>>> Awhile back, The Three Body Problem was mentioned. In that thread,
>>>>>>> there was no mention of the current Netflix version. Was this mentioned
>>>>>>> somewhere else and I just missed it? Google groups is of no help any
>>>>>>> more.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I have just started the series and I am intrigued, so far. Just two
>>>>>>> episodes. My wife is rather "meh" about it, but she said the same thing
>>>>>>> about Star Trek 1 which in reality she HATED so I may be watching it
>>>>>>> after she goes to bed.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ----------------
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Dave Scruggs
>>>>>>> Senior Software Engineer - Lockheed Martin, et. al (mostly Retired)
>>>>>>> Captain - Boulder Creek Fire (Retired)
>>>>>>> Board of Directors - Boulder Creek Fire Protection District (What was I
>>>>>>> thinking?)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I did not like the Netflix version, have yet to read the book.  Too much
>>>>>> time spent on the China Cultural Revolution and their violence against
>>>>>> the educated.  Felt like a Children of the Corn mini series.  I gave up
>>>>>> after two episodes.
>>>>>
>>>>> I've known several people whose lives were damaged by that event. And
>>>>> these were the lucky ones, who made it to the west.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> One scientist I knew never got over it, especially the abuse suffered by
>>>>> her mother.  One might have expected her father, an educated man who had
>>>>> lived in the West and still had children living there to be as big a
>>>>> target. But he was left alone, she said, because he was a renowned
>>>>> gerontologist and  the Party leadership was getting older.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Another distinguished scientist told me he reached the last year of
>>>>> secondary education only to realize that he'd learned absolutely nothing
>>>>> owing to the constant meetings and demonstrations.  Ignoring his
>>>>> teachers, he packed four years of school into one.  Judging by his
>>>>> subsequent career, he kept up that level of effort for  the next few
>>>>> decades.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> William Hyde
>>>>
>>>> One of my Dad's mainland Chinese grad students from OU lived with us for a
>>>> couple of years from 1973 to 1974 and worked for my Dad from 1973 to 1995.
>>>> He came over to the USA in 1966 or 1967 and got a PhD in Chemical
>>>> Engineering from OU in 1973.  I heard enough stories from him about
>>>> growing on a farm in China, living in a cave, starving all the time.  If
>>>> our family did not eat everything at supper then he would finish
>>>> everything off.  It took my mother several months break him of that
>>>> habit.  But he never got fat.  He never mentioned anything about the
>>>> Cultural Revolution but I suspect it was the reason why he left China.
>>>>
>>>> He was incredibly smart, he would give me an algorithm and I would code it
>>>> up in Fortran 66 for him in a subroutine and give him the card deck. He
>>>> was very submissive, he would never look you in the face, would always
>>>> look down.  He went back to mainland China in 1995 to help with his
>>>> sister's export business.  Sadly, he soon had a heart attack and passed
>>>> away.  His sister was kind enough to call my father and tell us.
>>>>
>>>> I know several people in the USA who had to leave Iran when they had their
>>>> cultural revolution.  Mostly engineers working for USA companies like
>>>> Dupont in Iran.  I've gotten a few stories from them, grim, very grim. 
>>>> One of my classmates at TAMU disappeared at the midyear of our junior year
>>>> in 1980 when the Iranian Embassy in the USA sent him a letter cutting off
>>>> his funds and ordering him to come home.  They also revoked his visa but
>>>> President Reagan gave all those people green card status in 1981.  He
>>>> refused to go home to Iran since he was a nephew of the Shah, he figured
>>>> that they would shoot him the minute he stepped off the plane.
>>>>
>>>> In other words, the various Cultural Revolutions are a little too real for
>>>> me and I do not enjoy reading about or viewing them.
>>>>
>>>> Lynn
>>>>
>>>
>>> With this historical luggage I can never understand how people in europe
>>> can insist on voting for socialists. Give them enough power and they tend
>>> to repeat themselves. Just look at the socialist UK government now cracking
>>> down on free speech. Very sad.
>>
>> Incredibly sad. And the Democrat candidate here in the USA is talking
>> freezing food prices and making grocery stores report any changes in their
>> prices, causing huge paperwork and never ending bureaucracies.
>>
>> Lynn
>>
>
>What!?! Jesus Christ, do people never learn? When has freezing prices and
>forcing markets under political control ever benefitted anyone except,
>maybe, politicians?
>
>Sounds like the US is up for a huge left torn in case Cackles wins. But
>let's hope and pray that Trump wins. All else will be a huge disaster.

Still getting our Putin/Trump Talking Points from wherever, I see.

I suggest getting a grip and consider Trump's telling his Christian
voters that this November is the last time they will ever need to
vote. Political nonsense, at best.
--
"Here lies the Tuscan poet Aretino,
Who evil spoke of everyone but God,
Giving as his excuse, 'I never knew him.'"

[D]

On Sun, 18 Aug 2024, Paul S Person wrote:

> On Sat, 17 Aug 2024 21:52:07 +0200, D <***@example.net> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Sat, 17 Aug 2024, Lynn McGuire wrote:
>>
>>> On 8/17/2024 4:51 AM, D wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, 16 Aug 2024, Lynn McGuire wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 8/16/2024 4:55 PM, William Hyde wrote:
>>>>>> Lynn McGuire wrote:
>>>>>>> On 8/16/2024 1:26 PM, BCFD 36 wrote:
>>>>>>>> Awhile back, The Three Body Problem was mentioned. In that thread,
>>>>>>>> there was no mention of the current Netflix version. Was this mentioned
>>>>>>>> somewhere else and I just missed it? Google groups is of no help any
>>>>>>>> more.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I have just started the series and I am intrigued, so far. Just two
>>>>>>>> episodes. My wife is rather "meh" about it, but she said the same thing
>>>>>>>> about Star Trek 1 which in reality she HATED so I may be watching it
>>>>>>>> after she goes to bed.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> ----------------
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Dave Scruggs
>>>>>>>> Senior Software Engineer - Lockheed Martin, et. al (mostly Retired)
>>>>>>>> Captain - Boulder Creek Fire (Retired)
>>>>>>>> Board of Directors - Boulder Creek Fire Protection District (What was I
>>>>>>>> thinking?)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I did not like the Netflix version, have yet to read the book.  Too much
>>>>>>> time spent on the China Cultural Revolution and their violence against
>>>>>>> the educated.  Felt like a Children of the Corn mini series.  I gave up
>>>>>>> after two episodes.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I've known several people whose lives were damaged by that event. And
>>>>>> these were the lucky ones, who made it to the west.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> One scientist I knew never got over it, especially the abuse suffered by
>>>>>> her mother.  One might have expected her father, an educated man who had
>>>>>> lived in the West and still had children living there to be as big a
>>>>>> target. But he was left alone, she said, because he was a renowned
>>>>>> gerontologist and  the Party leadership was getting older.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Another distinguished scientist told me he reached the last year of
>>>>>> secondary education only to realize that he'd learned absolutely nothing
>>>>>> owing to the constant meetings and demonstrations.  Ignoring his
>>>>>> teachers, he packed four years of school into one.  Judging by his
>>>>>> subsequent career, he kept up that level of effort for  the next few
>>>>>> decades.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> William Hyde
>>>>>
>>>>> One of my Dad's mainland Chinese grad students from OU lived with us for a
>>>>> couple of years from 1973 to 1974 and worked for my Dad from 1973 to 1995.
>>>>> He came over to the USA in 1966 or 1967 and got a PhD in Chemical
>>>>> Engineering from OU in 1973.  I heard enough stories from him about
>>>>> growing on a farm in China, living in a cave, starving all the time.  If
>>>>> our family did not eat everything at supper then he would finish
>>>>> everything off.  It took my mother several months break him of that
>>>>> habit.  But he never got fat.  He never mentioned anything about the
>>>>> Cultural Revolution but I suspect it was the reason why he left China.
>>>>>
>>>>> He was incredibly smart, he would give me an algorithm and I would code it
>>>>> up in Fortran 66 for him in a subroutine and give him the card deck. He
>>>>> was very submissive, he would never look you in the face, would always
>>>>> look down.  He went back to mainland China in 1995 to help with his
>>>>> sister's export business.  Sadly, he soon had a heart attack and passed
>>>>> away.  His sister was kind enough to call my father and tell us.
>>>>>
>>>>> I know several people in the USA who had to leave Iran when they had their
>>>>> cultural revolution.  Mostly engineers working for USA companies like
>>>>> Dupont in Iran.  I've gotten a few stories from them, grim, very grim. 
>>>>> One of my classmates at TAMU disappeared at the midyear of our junior year
>>>>> in 1980 when the Iranian Embassy in the USA sent him a letter cutting off
>>>>> his funds and ordering him to come home.  They also revoked his visa but
>>>>> President Reagan gave all those people green card status in 1981.  He
>>>>> refused to go home to Iran since he was a nephew of the Shah, he figured
>>>>> that they would shoot him the minute he stepped off the plane.
>>>>>
>>>>> In other words, the various Cultural Revolutions are a little too real for
>>>>> me and I do not enjoy reading about or viewing them.
>>>>>
>>>>> Lynn
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> With this historical luggage I can never understand how people in europe
>>>> can insist on voting for socialists. Give them enough power and they tend
>>>> to repeat themselves. Just look at the socialist UK government now cracking
>>>> down on free speech. Very sad.
>>>
>>> Incredibly sad. And the Democrat candidate here in the USA is talking
>>> freezing food prices and making grocery stores report any changes in their
>>> prices, causing huge paperwork and never ending bureaucracies.
>>>
>>> Lynn
>>>
>>
>> What!?! Jesus Christ, do people never learn? When has freezing prices and
>> forcing markets under political control ever benefitted anyone except,
>> maybe, politicians?
>>
>> Sounds like the US is up for a huge left torn in case Cackles wins. But
>> let's hope and pray that Trump wins. All else will be a huge disaster.
>
> Still getting our Putin/Trump Talking Points from wherever, I see.
>
> I suggest getting a grip and consider Trump's telling his Christian
> voters that this November is the last time they will ever need to
> vote. Political nonsense, at best.
>

But that's a classic willful misrepresentation and misinterpretation of
what he said. He clarified what he meant for the press that is completely
un able and always takes everything he says literally. The press are no
different from 5 years old children. But when it comes to Cackles team,
there is no stopping the obfuscation, excuses and silencing and lawfare
that is tolerated.

[quadibloc]

On Sun, 18 Aug 2024 16:21:26 +0000, Paul S Person wrote:
> On Sat, 17 Aug 2024 21:52:07 +0200, D <***@example.net> wrote:
>>What!?! Jesus Christ, do people never learn? When has freezing prices and
>>forcing markets under political control ever benefitted anyone except,
>>maybe, politicians?
>>
>>Sounds like the US is up for a huge left torn in case Cackles wins. But
>>let's hope and pray that Trump wins. All else will be a huge disaster.

A Trump victory is what would be a huge disaster.

He denies the science of global warming; he interfered with states
taking
necessary public health measures against COVID-19, and he spewed lies
about
a stolen election that contributed to the January 6 insurrection.

However, while grocery price-gouging makes a nice scapegoat... in
Canada,
we have a movement to boycott Loblaws, as if it's to blame for the rise
in world food prices. Apparently people haven't noticed Russia invading
Ukraine... which, of course, is another _big_ reason why a Trump win
would be a disaster for the whole world.

Kamala Harris should indeed stay away from policies that will be
perceived
in the U.S. as wild-eyed socialism. Particularly when indeed there is no
need for them.

> Still getting our Putin/Trump Talking Points from wherever, I see.
>
> I suggest getting a grip and consider Trump's telling his Christian
> voters that this November is the last time they will ever need to
> vote. Political nonsense, at best.

At least this particular remark wasn't promising a one-party
dictatorship.

He was merely stating that he would shift what was normal so that
evangelicals
wouldn't feel pressure to vote, since America would be back where it was
in the
1950s, so neither party would pursue policies they found threatening.

Nonsense, yes. Moving the needle of what is considered 'normal' is not
done in
a single Presidential term.

John Savard

[D]

On Mon, 19 Aug 2024, quadibloc wrote:

> A Trump victory is what would be a huge disaster.

Actually anf factually, this is incorrect.

> He denies the science of global warming; he interfered with states
> taking

Good man! Eco-fascism is just a mind virus to make the public give over
all power to politicians. I bet we are still alive in 20 years time,
care to take the bet?

Also note how all politicians travel with private jets, and do their
best to kill nuclear with too many laws. That proves that they don't
even believe it themselves.

> necessary public health measures against COVID-19, and he spewed lies

The best policy for corona was to do nothing. Sweden proved that. And
yes, I was there on the ground, yes, here and there some idiots masked,
but overall I could live my life fairly freely until towards the end
when they started to f*ck with business.

> about
> a stolen election that contributed to the January 6 insurrection.

There was no insurrection and Trump certainly did not take part. In fact
he tried to calm things done. What is a scadal is the lawfare where the
democrats are weaponizing the state to try and block him from winning.
That, if anything, should be the basis of a legal process and prison for
Sleepy Joe and Cackles.

> in world food prices. Apparently people haven't noticed Russia invading
> Ukraine... which, of course, is another _big_ reason why a Trump win
> would be a disaster for the whole world.

The US should not fix the mess of europe. It's europes own mess to fix.
Paradoxically, the US pulling out (which is their right, it is not fair
that the US tax payer should prop up europe) will be the best thing that
ever happened to europe. It will make it more unified, and make it grow
up and fix its own problems. So the EU will become a self-reliant
partner, better able to assist the US in the future.

Having US come in at the last minute saving the world again, would of
course be great, if I were to think as an egoistic european tax payer,
but we must realize the it is nothing but egoism to want the US to foot
EU:s bills.

> Kamala Harris should indeed stay away from policies that will be
> perceived
> in the U.S. as wild-eyed socialism. Particularly when indeed there is no
> need for them.

Not only that, she should stay away from politics. As a woman she is
less fit for presidency than a man due to biological reasons. Also note
that Trump will keep world peace, and that Putin attacked due to Sleepy
Joe. Trump knows how to handle bullies, Putin will walk all over
Cackles.

[Paul S Person]

On Mon, 19 Aug 2024 10:06:54 +0200, D <***@example.net> wrote:

>
>
>On Mon, 19 Aug 2024, quadibloc wrote:
>
>> A Trump victory is what would be a huge disaster.
>
>Actually anf factually, this is incorrect.
>
>> He denies the science of global warming; he interfered with states
>> taking
>
>Good man! Eco-fascism is just a mind virus to make the public give over
>all power to politicians. I bet we are still alive in 20 years time,
>care to take the bet?
>
>Also note how all politicians travel with private jets, and do their
>best to kill nuclear with too many laws. That proves that they don't
>even believe it themselves.
>
>> necessary public health measures against COVID-19, and he spewed lies
>
>The best policy for corona was to do nothing. Sweden proved that. And
>yes, I was there on the ground, yes, here and there some idiots masked,
>but overall I could live my life fairly freely until towards the end
>when they started to f*ck with business.
>
>> about
>> a stolen election that contributed to the January 6 insurrection.
>
>There was no insurrection and Trump certainly did not take part. In fact
>he tried to calm things done. What is a scadal is the lawfare where the
>democrats are weaponizing the state to try and block him from winning.
>That, if anything, should be the basis of a legal process and prison for
>Sleepy Joe and Cackles.
>
>> in world food prices. Apparently people haven't noticed Russia invading
>> Ukraine... which, of course, is another _big_ reason why a Trump win
>> would be a disaster for the whole world.
>
>The US should not fix the mess of europe. It's europes own mess to fix.
>Paradoxically, the US pulling out (which is their right, it is not fair
>that the US tax payer should prop up europe) will be the best thing that
>ever happened to europe. It will make it more unified, and make it grow
>up and fix its own problems. So the EU will become a self-reliant
>partner, better able to assist the US in the future.
>
>Having US come in at the last minute saving the world again, would of
>course be great, if I were to think as an egoistic european tax payer,
>but we must realize the it is nothing but egoism to want the US to foot
>EU:s bills.
>
>> Kamala Harris should indeed stay away from policies that will be
>> perceived
>> in the U.S. as wild-eyed socialism. Particularly when indeed there is no
>> need for them.
>
>Not only that, she should stay away from politics. As a woman she is
>less fit for presidency than a man due to biological reasons. Also note
>that Trump will keep world peace, and that Putin attacked due to Sleepy
>Joe. Trump knows how to handle bullies, Putin will walk all over
>Cackles.

You /really/ need to get connected to reality.
--
"Here lies the Tuscan poet Aretino,
Who evil spoke of everyone but God,
Giving as his excuse, 'I never knew him.'"

[D]

On Mon, 19 Aug 2024, Paul S Person wrote:

> On Mon, 19 Aug 2024 10:06:54 +0200, D <***@example.net> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, 19 Aug 2024, quadibloc wrote:
>>
>>> A Trump victory is what would be a huge disaster.
>>
>> Actually anf factually, this is incorrect.
>>
>>> He denies the science of global warming; he interfered with states
>>> taking
>>
>> Good man! Eco-fascism is just a mind virus to make the public give over
>> all power to politicians. I bet we are still alive in 20 years time,
>> care to take the bet?
>>
>> Also note how all politicians travel with private jets, and do their
>> best to kill nuclear with too many laws. That proves that they don't
>> even believe it themselves.
>>
>>> necessary public health measures against COVID-19, and he spewed lies
>>
>> The best policy for corona was to do nothing. Sweden proved that. And
>> yes, I was there on the ground, yes, here and there some idiots masked,
>> but overall I could live my life fairly freely until towards the end
>> when they started to f*ck with business.
>>
>>> about
>>> a stolen election that contributed to the January 6 insurrection.
>>
>> There was no insurrection and Trump certainly did not take part. In fact
>> he tried to calm things done. What is a scadal is the lawfare where the
>> democrats are weaponizing the state to try and block him from winning.
>> That, if anything, should be the basis of a legal process and prison for
>> Sleepy Joe and Cackles.
>>
>>> in world food prices. Apparently people haven't noticed Russia invading
>>> Ukraine... which, of course, is another _big_ reason why a Trump win
>>> would be a disaster for the whole world.
>>
>> The US should not fix the mess of europe. It's europes own mess to fix.
>> Paradoxically, the US pulling out (which is their right, it is not fair
>> that the US tax payer should prop up europe) will be the best thing that
>> ever happened to europe. It will make it more unified, and make it grow
>> up and fix its own problems. So the EU will become a self-reliant
>> partner, better able to assist the US in the future.
>>
>> Having US come in at the last minute saving the world again, would of
>> course be great, if I were to think as an egoistic european tax payer,
>> but we must realize the it is nothing but egoism to want the US to foot
>> EU:s bills.
>>
>>> Kamala Harris should indeed stay away from policies that will be
>>> perceived
>>> in the U.S. as wild-eyed socialism. Particularly when indeed there is no
>>> need for them.
>>
>> Not only that, she should stay away from politics. As a woman she is
>> less fit for presidency than a man due to biological reasons. Also note
>> that Trump will keep world peace, and that Putin attacked due to Sleepy
>> Joe. Trump knows how to handle bullies, Putin will walk all over
>> Cackles.
>
> You /really/ need to get connected to reality.
>

No Paul, you need to get connected. I'm Trumpishly connected to reality
myself, thank you very much.

[Bobbie Sellers]

On 8/19/24 01:06, D wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, 19 Aug 2024, quadibloc wrote:
>
>> A Trump victory is what would be a huge disaster.
>
> Actually anf factually, this is incorrect.

Totally accurate it is.
>
>> He denies the science of global warming; he interfered with states
>> taking
>
> Good man! Eco-fascism is just a mind virus to make the public give over
> all power to politicians. I bet we are still alive in 20 years time,
> care to take the bet?

Baloney! This is the line from the Fossil Fuel companies
which want to keep making money in the same destrubtive way.
>
> Also note how all politicians travel with private jets, and do their
> best to kill nuclear with too many laws. That proves that they don't
> even believe it themselves.
>

Have you every worked in Nuclear? I did and it is a mess
radioactive leaks have to be dewalt with. Nuclear Power should be
under military control where failure to do your duty is a prosecutable
offence.

>> necessary public health measures against COVID-19, and he spewed lies

Trump's mode of converse is to lie and lie again. He knew just
how bad the crisis of Covid 19 would be and he lied to the American
Public.

>
> The best policy for corona was to do nothing. Sweden proved that. And
> yes, I was there on the ground, yes, here and there some idiots masked,
> but overall I could live my life fairly freely until towards the end
> when they started to f*ck with business.
More baloney0.
>
>> about
>> a stolen election that contributed to the January 6 insurrection.
>
> There was no insurrection and Trump certainly did not take part. In fact
> he tried to calm things done. What is a scadal is the lawfare where the
> democrats are weaponizing the state to try and block him from winning.
> That, if anything, should be the basis of a legal process and prison for
> Sleepy Joe and Cackles.
We watched it live on TV and it was a murderous insurrection and
thank Heaven Pence sought good advice

>
>> in world food prices. Apparently people haven't noticed Russia invading
>> Ukraine... which, of course, is another _big_ reason why a Trump win
>> would be a disaster for the whole world.
>
> The US should not fix the mess of europe. It's europes own mess to fix.
> Paradoxically, the US pulling out (which is their right, it is not fair
> that the US tax payer should prop up europe) will be the best thing that
> ever happened to europe. It will make it more unified, and make it grow
> up and fix its own problems. So the EU will become a self-reliant
> partner, better able to assist the US in the future.

All the continents are on the same planet the air circulates around the
planet and pollution that happens anywhere will be here
shortly.

>
> Having US come in at the last minute saving the world again, would of
> course be great, if I were to think as an egoistic european tax payer,
> but we must realize the it is nothing but egoism to want the US to foot
> EU:s bills.

Not at the last minute. You follow Putin's corrupt line, the
chief theif in a nation run by theives. Thereatening the rest of the
world with nuclear warfare if they help the Ukrainie rest his
Hitler-like attack on a peaceful neighbor.

>
>> Kamala Harris should indeed stay away from policies that will be
>> perceived
>> in the U.S. as wild-eyed socialism. Particularly when indeed there is no
>> need for them.

"Wild eyes socialism" what a cliche to use in a world in crisis
In the USA we are in a information war with people who want to be
in a simpler world and have pulled the covers over their head to
ignore reality.


>
> Not only that, she should stay away from politics. As a woman she is
> less fit for presidency than a man due to biological reasons. Also note
> that Trump will keep world peace, and that Putin attacked due to Sleepy
> Joe. Trump knows how to handle bullies, Putin will walk all over
> Cackles.

What bilogical reason are you lying about now? You BS just like Trump
who does not know how to deal with women not seducable with money.

Kamala was a prosecutor before she was a Senator and she knows
how best to deal with Criminals of the Putin and TGrump stripe.

bliss

--
b l i s s - S F 4 e v e r at D S L E x t r e m e dot com

[Lynn McGuire]

On 8/19/2024 4:08 PM, Bobbie Sellers wrote:
> On 8/19/24 01:06, D wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Mon, 19 Aug 2024, quadibloc wrote:
>>
>>> A Trump victory is what would be a huge disaster.
>>
>> Actually anf factually, this is incorrect.
>
>     Totally accurate it is.
>>
>>> He denies the science of global warming; he interfered with states
>>> taking
>>
>> Good man! Eco-fascism is just a mind virus to make the public give over
>> all power to politicians. I bet we are still alive in 20 years time,
>> care to take the bet?
>
>     Baloney! This is the line from the Fossil Fuel companies
> which want to keep making money in the same destrubtive way.

Nope, just more lies about the energy making our lives more comfortable.

>> Also note how all politicians travel with private jets, and do their
>> best to kill nuclear with too many laws. That proves that they don't
>> even believe it themselves.
>>
>
>     Have you every worked in Nuclear?  I did and it is a mess
> radioactive  leaks have to be dewalt with.  Nuclear Power should be
> under military control where failure to do your duty is a prosecutable
> offence.

Yes, I have. Lets see, the number one user of nuclear power plants is
the USA. How many people have been killed in nuclear power plants in
the USA ? That number is ZERO.

Nuclear power is so cheap, safe, and useful that a company just bought
several nuclear power plants that were prematurely shut down in the USA
and is going to refuel them and start them back up.

Lynn

[D]

On Mon, 19 Aug 2024, Lynn McGuire wrote:

> On 8/19/2024 4:08 PM, Bobbie Sellers wrote:
>> On 8/19/24 01:06, D wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, 19 Aug 2024, quadibloc wrote:
>>>
>>>> A Trump victory is what would be a huge disaster.
>>>
>>> Actually anf factually, this is incorrect.
>>
>>     Totally accurate it is.
>>>
>>>> He denies the science of global warming; he interfered with states
>>>> taking
>>>
>>> Good man! Eco-fascism is just a mind virus to make the public give over
>>> all power to politicians. I bet we are still alive in 20 years time,
>>> care to take the bet?
>>
>>     Baloney! This is the line from the Fossil Fuel companies
>> which want to keep making money in the same destrubtive way.
>
> Nope, just more lies about the energy making our lives more comfortable.
>
>>> Also note how all politicians travel with private jets, and do their
>>> best to kill nuclear with too many laws. That proves that they don't
>>> even believe it themselves.
>>>
>>
>>     Have you every worked in Nuclear?  I did and it is a mess
>> radioactive  leaks have to be dewalt with.  Nuclear Power should be
>> under military control where failure to do your duty is a prosecutable
>> offence.
>
> Yes, I have. Lets see, the number one user of nuclear power plants is the
> USA. How many people have been killed in nuclear power plants in the USA ?
> That number is ZERO.
>
> Nuclear power is so cheap, safe, and useful that a company just bought
> several nuclear power plants that were prematurely shut down in the USA and
> is going to refuel them and start them back up.
>
> Lynn
>

Oh, and for regular readers, let me hasten to add that the deaths due to
the fukushima nuclear accident was zero as well. The majority died due to
weather conditions and later accidents. Deaths due to "nuclear" zero.

[Titus G]

On 20/08/24 09:08, Bobbie Sellers wrote:
> On 8/19/24 01:06, D wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, 19 Aug 2024, quadibloc wrote:
>>

My nickname for quadibloc is FourBricks (in an Otherwise Empty Skull).
He is the reigning newsgroup loony with absolute faith in USA propaganda
and a self proclaimed expert on US politics from his padded cell in
Canada. All the problems in the world are caused by angry young men,
(not completely white), and will be solved with obedient Vat grown girls
but that is his story to tell.
"D" which may stand for Dishonest or Dumb and definitely Definitely
Right Wing is agreeing with him. Ha, ha, ha.
They both live in my kill file.
You, are needlessly wearing out your typing fingers.

[BCFD 36]

On 8/19/24 21:06, Titus G wrote:
> On 20/08/24 09:08, Bobbie Sellers wrote:
>> On 8/19/24 01:06, D wrote:
>>>
>>> On Mon, 19 Aug 2024, quadibloc wrote:
>>>
>
> My nickname for quadibloc is FourBricks (in an Otherwise Empty Skull).
> He is the reigning newsgroup loony with absolute faith in USA propaganda
> and a self proclaimed expert on US politics from his padded cell in
> Canada. All the problems in the world are caused by angry young men,
> (not completely white), and will be solved with obedient Vat grown girls
> but that is his story to tell.
> "D" which may stand for Dishonest or Dumb and definitely Definitely
> Right Wing is agreeing with him. Ha, ha, ha.
> They both live in my kill file.
> You, are needlessly wearing out your typing fingers.


I think he may have to join Jibni in mine also. I am not entirely sure D
is a human being, could be a bot. Or maybe a member of a troll farm.
Either way, he contributes nothing to this group other than to spew
right wing propaganda.

--
----------------

Dave Scruggs
Senior Software Engineer - Lockheed Martin, et. al (mostly Retired)
Captain - Boulder Creek Fire (Retired)
Board of Directors - Boulder Creek Fire Protection District (What was I
thinking?)

[Paul S Person]

On Mon, 19 Aug 2024 14:08:09 -0700, Bobbie Sellers
<***@mouse-potato.com> wrote:

>On 8/19/24 01:06, D wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Mon, 19 Aug 2024, quadibloc wrote:

<snippo>

>>> necessary public health measures against COVID-19, and he spewed lies
>
> Trump's mode of converse is to lie and lie again. He knew just
>how bad the crisis of Covid 19 would be and he lied to the American
>Public.

He did much much worse -- he failed to use the opportunity to rally
the nation behind him and be swept into office in 2020 by a landslide.

Instead, he chose to alienate pretty much every group in the country
except his base and those traditional Republicans whose party loyalty
got the better of their judgement.

Trump just isn't that good a politician. The pandemic was a golden
opportunity and he didn't know it.
--
"Here lies the Tuscan poet Aretino,
Who evil spoke of everyone but God,
Giving as his excuse, 'I never knew him.'"

[Bobbie Sellers]

On 8/20/24 08:51, Paul S Person wrote:
> On Mon, 19 Aug 2024 14:08:09 -0700, Bobbie Sellers
> <***@mouse-potato.com> wrote:
>
>> On 8/19/24 01:06, D wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, 19 Aug 2024, quadibloc wrote:
>
> <snippo>
>
>>>> necessary public health measures against COVID-19, and he spewed lies
>>
>> Trump's mode of converse is to lie and lie again. He knew just
>> how bad the crisis of Covid 19 would be and he lied to the American
>> Public.
>
> He did much much worse -- he failed to use the opportunity to rally
> the nation behind him and be swept into office in 2020 by a landslide.

He won the Electoral College and Hillary Clinton won the
popular vote.

>
> Instead, he chose to alienate pretty much every group in the country
> except his base and those traditional Republicans whose party loyalty
> got the better of their judgement.
>
> Trump just isn't that good a politician. The pandemic was a golden
> opportunity and he didn't know it.

He was only a successful businessman on a TV show.
Apparently the only law he fully understood was the Tax law and
the way he could use Bankruptcy to escape from paying his debts.

bliss

--
b l i s s - S F 4 e v e r at D S L E x t r e m e dot com

[Cryptoengineer]

On 8/20/2024 4:30 PM, Bobbie Sellers wrote:
> On 8/20/24 08:51, Paul S Person wrote:
>> On Mon, 19 Aug 2024 14:08:09 -0700, Bobbie Sellers
>> <***@mouse-potato.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 8/19/24 01:06, D wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, 19 Aug 2024, quadibloc wrote:
>>
>> <snippo>
>>
>>>>> necessary public health measures against COVID-19, and he spewed lies
>>>
>>>     Trump's mode of converse is to lie and lie again. He knew just
>>> how bad the crisis of Covid 19 would be and he lied to the American
>>> Public.
>>
>> He did much much worse -- he failed to use the opportunity to rally
>> the nation behind him and be swept into office in 2020 by a landslide.
>
>     He won the Electoral College and Hillary Clinton won the
> popular vote.
>
>>
>> Instead, he chose to alienate pretty much every group in the country
>> except his base and those traditional Republicans whose party loyalty
>> got the better of their judgement.
>>
>> Trump just isn't that good a politician. The pandemic was a golden
>> opportunity and he didn't know it.
>
>     He was only a successful businessman on a TV show.
>     Apparently the only law he fully understood was the Tax law and
> the way he could use Bankruptcy to escape from paying his debts.

We're talking about a man who went bankrupt *running a casino*.

pt

[William Hyde]

Cryptoengineer wrote:
> On 8/20/2024 4:30 PM, Bobbie Sellers wrote:
>> On 8/20/24 08:51, Paul S Person wrote:
>>> On Mon, 19 Aug 2024 14:08:09 -0700, Bobbie Sellers
>>> <***@mouse-potato.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 8/19/24 01:06, D wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, 19 Aug 2024, quadibloc wrote:
>>>
>>> <snippo>
>>>
>>>>>> necessary public health measures against COVID-19, and he spewed lies
>>>>
>>>>     Trump's mode of converse is to lie and lie again. He knew just
>>>> how bad the crisis of Covid 19 would be and he lied to the American
>>>> Public.
>>>
>>> He did much much worse -- he failed to use the opportunity to rally
>>> the nation behind him and be swept into office in 2020 by a landslide.
>>
>>      He won the Electoral College and Hillary Clinton won the
>> popular vote.
>>
>>>
>>> Instead, he chose to alienate pretty much every group in the country
>>> except his base and those traditional Republicans whose party loyalty
>>> got the better of their judgement.
>>>
>>> Trump just isn't that good a politician. The pandemic was a golden
>>> opportunity and he didn't know it.
>>
>>      He was only a successful businessman on a TV show.
>>      Apparently the only law he fully understood was the Tax law and
>> the way he could use Bankruptcy to escape from paying his debts.
>
> We're talking about a man who went bankrupt *running a casino*.

Worse, he was warned.

An analyst for a bank that was thinking of lending money to build this
casino concluded that it would not attract enough money to pay its debt
load.

When Trump heard of this, he pressured the bank to fire the analyst. He
was fired, the bank made the loan, and lost money.

This is not a recent story, but something I read long before Trump
became politically active. It speaks to the incompetence of the
democrat's opposition research that they have not mentioned it. An
interview with the analyst would be moderately useful.

Banks can be quite stupid sometimes, as the former shareholders in
Washington Mutual or Lehmann brothers can attest or as as shareholders
in the banks that lent Musk the money to buy twitter are discovering
with, one hopes, considerably less pain.


William Hyde

[Titus G]

On 22/08/24 09:33, William Hyde wrote:
> Cryptoengineer wrote:
>> On 8/20/2024 4:30 PM, Bobbie Sellers wrote:
snip
>>> He was only a successful businessman on a TV show. Apparently the
>>> only law he fully understood was the Tax law and the way he could
>>> use Bankruptcy to escape from paying his debts.
>>
>> We're talking about a man who went bankrupt *running a casino*.

I don't know, but I didn't think he had been bankrupt personally but
that companies of his have. I think that he will have profited from
ownership and bankruptcy of these companies making him a very successful
businessman.
> Worse, he was warned.
>
> An analyst for a bank that was thinking of lending money to build
> this casino concluded that it would not attract enough money to pay
> its debt load.
>
> When Trump heard of this, he pressured the bank to fire the analyst.
> He was fired, the bank made the loan, and lost money.

I think Trump would have made money personally or directed money to
repay favours/create obligations.
It all sounds like pot boiler fiction but he gets away with it. In one
court case, Trump's legal representatives claimed that the European bank
seeking repayment of millions were at fault for failing to take into
account Trump's reputation for loan defaulting before approving loans to
his companies.

> Banks can be quite stupid sometimes, snip

Trump deals in such large sums that I would suspect corruption before
stupidity of bank employees or directors.

[Paul S Person]

On Thu, 22 Aug 2024 17:11:43 +1200, Titus G <***@nowhere.com> wrote:

>On 22/08/24 09:33, William Hyde wrote:
>> Cryptoengineer wrote:
>>> On 8/20/2024 4:30 PM, Bobbie Sellers wrote:
>snip
>>>> He was only a successful businessman on a TV show. Apparently the
>>>> only law he fully understood was the Tax law and the way he could
>>>> use Bankruptcy to escape from paying his debts.
>>>
>>> We're talking about a man who went bankrupt *running a casino*.
>
>I don't know, but I didn't think he had been bankrupt personally but
>that companies of his have. I think that he will have profited from
>ownership and bankruptcy of these companies making him a very successful
>businessman.
>> Worse, he was warned.
>>
>> An analyst for a bank that was thinking of lending money to build
>> this casino concluded that it would not attract enough money to pay
>> its debt load.
>>
>> When Trump heard of this, he pressured the bank to fire the analyst.
>> He was fired, the bank made the loan, and lost money.
>
>I think Trump would have made money personally or directed money to
>repay favours/create obligations.
>It all sounds like pot boiler fiction but he gets away with it. In one
>court case, Trump's legal representatives claimed that the European bank
>seeking repayment of millions were at fault for failing to take into
>account Trump's reputation for loan defaulting before approving loans to
>his companies.
>
>> Banks can be quite stupid sometimes, snip
>
>Trump deals in such large sums that I would suspect corruption before
>stupidity of bank employees or directors.

If he made a practice of losing money on casinos, I'm surprised the
Mob didn't take him out years ago.

Maybe that RICO case in Georgia (if it ever gets going) has some
justification for the "RICO".
--
"Here lies the Tuscan poet Aretino,
Who evil spoke of everyone but God,
Giving as his excuse, 'I never knew him.'"

[Mad Hamish]

On Thu, 22 Aug 2024 09:27:27 -0700, Paul S Person
<***@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:

>On Thu, 22 Aug 2024 17:11:43 +1200, Titus G <***@nowhere.com> wrote:
>
>>On 22/08/24 09:33, William Hyde wrote:
>>> Cryptoengineer wrote:
>>>> On 8/20/2024 4:30 PM, Bobbie Sellers wrote:
>>snip
>>>>> He was only a successful businessman on a TV show. Apparently the
>>>>> only law he fully understood was the Tax law and the way he could
>>>>> use Bankruptcy to escape from paying his debts.
>>>>
>>>> We're talking about a man who went bankrupt *running a casino*.
>>
>>I don't know, but I didn't think he had been bankrupt personally but
>>that companies of his have. I think that he will have profited from
>>ownership and bankruptcy of these companies making him a very successful
>>businessman.
>>> Worse, he was warned.
>>>
>>> An analyst for a bank that was thinking of lending money to build
>>> this casino concluded that it would not attract enough money to pay
>>> its debt load.
>>>
>>> When Trump heard of this, he pressured the bank to fire the analyst.
>>> He was fired, the bank made the loan, and lost money.
>>
>>I think Trump would have made money personally or directed money to
>>repay favours/create obligations.
>>It all sounds like pot boiler fiction but he gets away with it. In one
>>court case, Trump's legal representatives claimed that the European bank
>>seeking repayment of millions were at fault for failing to take into
>>account Trump's reputation for loan defaulting before approving loans to
>>his companies.
>>
>>> Banks can be quite stupid sometimes, snip
>>
>>Trump deals in such large sums that I would suspect corruption before
>>stupidity of bank employees or directors.
>
>If he made a practice of losing money on casinos, I'm surprised the
>Mob didn't take him out years ago.

It's not their money, but they could launder money through them anyway
>
>Maybe that RICO case in Georgia (if it ever gets going) has some
>justification for the "RICO".

[William Hyde]

Titus G wrote:
> On 22/08/24 09:33, William Hyde wrote:
>> Cryptoengineer wrote:
>>> On 8/20/2024 4:30 PM, Bobbie Sellers wrote:
> snip
>>>> He was only a successful businessman on a TV show. Apparently the
>>>> only law he fully understood was the Tax law and the way he could
>>>> use Bankruptcy to escape from paying his debts.
>>>
>>> We're talking about a man who went bankrupt *running a casino*.
>
> I don't know, but I didn't think he had been bankrupt personally but
> that companies of his have. I think that he will have profited from
> ownership and bankruptcy of these companies making him a very successful
> businessman.
>> Worse, he was warned.
>>
>> An analyst for a bank that was thinking of lending money to build
>> this casino concluded that it would not attract enough money to pay
>> its debt load.
>>
>> When Trump heard of this, he pressured the bank to fire the analyst.
>> He was fired, the bank made the loan, and lost money.
>
> I think Trump would have made money personally or directed money to
> repay favours/create obligations.


You are quite right about that. Certain entities he partially owned
went bust, but most of the pain was born by the debtors. Other of his
entities profited enough to overcome the small loss.


> It all sounds like pot boiler fiction but he gets away with it. In one
> court case, Trump's legal representatives claimed that the European bank
> seeking repayment of millions were at fault for failing to take into
> account Trump's reputation for loan defaulting before approving loans to
> his companies.

When the Hunt brothers went bankrupt trying to corner the silver market,
they hired a lawyer, at a huge salary and with the banks' money, to sue
the banks for making the loan. They did not expect to win, but while
the case was undecided they had the use of the money. They lost, of
course, but remained rich, if not as rich as they once were. The lawyer
also got rich. The banks lost a couple of billion.

>
>> Banks can be quite stupid sometimes, snip
>
> Trump deals in such large sums that I would suspect corruption before
> stupidity of bank employees or directors.

Having just reread "The Big Short" I am convinced that there is no limit
to human stupidity when greed is a factor.

Let us not forget that for decades, and still to some extent now, the
financial world considered volatility in share price as a measure of
risk. Why? Because they could compute it.


William Hyde

[Titus G]

On 23/08/24 08:37, William Hyde wrote:
snip
>
> Having just reread "The Big Short" I am convinced that there is no limit
> to human stupidity when greed is a factor.
>

I have not read that but am aware that the Global Financial Crisis of
2008 is a euphemism for FRAUD having read Matt Taibbi's version in
Rolling Stone.

[Dimensional Traveler]

On 8/20/2024 1:30 PM, Bobbie Sellers wrote:
> On 8/20/24 08:51, Paul S Person wrote:
>> On Mon, 19 Aug 2024 14:08:09 -0700, Bobbie Sellers
>> <***@mouse-potato.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 8/19/24 01:06, D wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, 19 Aug 2024, quadibloc wrote:
>>
>> <snippo>
>>
>>>>> necessary public health measures against COVID-19, and he spewed lies
>>>
>>>     Trump's mode of converse is to lie and lie again. He knew just
>>> how bad the crisis of Covid 19 would be and he lied to the American
>>> Public.
>>
>> He did much much worse -- he failed to use the opportunity to rally
>> the nation behind him and be swept into office in 2020 by a landslide.
>
>     He won the Electoral College and Hillary Clinton won the
> popular vote.
>
>>
>> Instead, he chose to alienate pretty much every group in the country
>> except his base and those traditional Republicans whose party loyalty
>> got the better of their judgement.
>>
>> Trump just isn't that good a politician. The pandemic was a golden
>> opportunity and he didn't know it.
>
>     He was only a successful businessman on a TV show.
>     Apparently the only law he fully understood was the Tax law and
> the way he could use Bankruptcy to escape from paying his debts.
>
Successful Con Man, not businessman. Most of his businesses went
bankrupt or lost money until he sold them.

--
I've done good in this world. Now I'm tired and just want to be a cranky
dirty old man.

[Paul S Person]

On Tue, 20 Aug 2024 13:30:39 -0700, Bobbie Sellers
<***@mouse-potato.com> wrote:

>On 8/20/24 08:51, Paul S Person wrote:
>> On Mon, 19 Aug 2024 14:08:09 -0700, Bobbie Sellers
>> <***@mouse-potato.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 8/19/24 01:06, D wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, 19 Aug 2024, quadibloc wrote:
>>
>> <snippo>
>>
>>>>> necessary public health measures against COVID-19, and he spewed lies
>>>
>>> Trump's mode of converse is to lie and lie again. He knew just
>>> how bad the crisis of Covid 19 would be and he lied to the American
>>> Public.
>>
>> He did much much worse -- he failed to use the opportunity to rally
>> the nation behind him and be swept into office in 2020 by a landslide.
>
> He won the Electoral College and Hillary Clinton won the
>popular vote.

Not in 2020 he didn't. He was defeated by "massive voter fraud" -- by
which he meant "a sh*tload of people voted for Biden", "voter fraud"
meaning "not voting Republican" in Republican-speak.

If people would just recognize this then
-- everything they say and do about "suppressing voter fraud" would
make perfect sense -- they are suppressing people who don't vote
Republican; and
-- we wouldn't have to read pathetic articles written in the fond
belief that they mean what everybody else means by "voter fraud".

>> Instead, he chose to alienate pretty much every group in the country
>> except his base and those traditional Republicans whose party loyalty
>> got the better of their judgement.
>>
>> Trump just isn't that good a politician. The pandemic was a golden
>> opportunity and he didn't know it.
>
> He was only a successful businessman on a TV show.
> Apparently the only law he fully understood was the Tax law and
>the way he could use Bankruptcy to escape from paying his debts.
--
"Here lies the Tuscan poet Aretino,
Who evil spoke of everyone but God,
Giving as his excuse, 'I never knew him.'"

[Mad Hamish]

On Tue, 20 Aug 2024 13:30:39 -0700, Bobbie Sellers
<***@mouse-potato.com> wrote:

>On 8/20/24 08:51, Paul S Person wrote:
>> On Mon, 19 Aug 2024 14:08:09 -0700, Bobbie Sellers
>> <***@mouse-potato.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 8/19/24 01:06, D wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, 19 Aug 2024, quadibloc wrote:
>>
>> <snippo>
>>
>>>>> necessary public health measures against COVID-19, and he spewed lies
>>>
>>> Trump's mode of converse is to lie and lie again. He knew just
>>> how bad the crisis of Covid 19 would be and he lied to the American
>>> Public.
>>
>> He did much much worse -- he failed to use the opportunity to rally
>> the nation behind him and be swept into office in 2020 by a landslide.
>
> He won the Electoral College and Hillary Clinton won the
>popular vote.
>
Who landed on the moon first in your timeline?
Because in this one he won the 2016 election against Hilary Clinton
but lost the 2020 election to Joe Biden.

>>
>> Instead, he chose to alienate pretty much every group in the country
>> except his base and those traditional Republicans whose party loyalty
>> got the better of their judgement.
>>
>> Trump just isn't that good a politician. The pandemic was a golden
>> opportunity and he didn't know it.
>
> He was only a successful businessman on a TV show.

He was fairly successful in NY real estate (a pretty well protected
business if you have enough capital) and he's had some success running
country clubs and hotels.
Of course in both those cases there's strong stenches of fraud
He pretty much failed outside of those areas

> Apparently the only law he fully understood was the Tax law and
>the way he could use Bankruptcy to escape from paying his debts.

[BCFD 36]

On 8/22/24 23:48, Mad Hamish wrote:

[stuff deleted]

>> He won the Electoral College and Hillary Clinton won the
>> popular vote.
>>
> Who landed on the moon first in your timeline?
> Because in this one he won the 2016 election against Hilary Clinton
> but lost the 2020 election to Joe Biden.

The first statement was completely true. In 2016 Hillary won the popular
vote, but scum bucket won the Electoral College. In 2020 Biden won the
popular vote by an even larger margin than Hillary and the Electoral
College.

At this point, the Electoral College is the only vote that counts in the
race for President/Vice President.

And Jules Verne landed on the moon first. Everyone knows that.

[more stuff deleted for brevity]

--
----------------

Dave Scruggs
Senior Software Engineer - Lockheed Martin, et. al (mostly Retired)
Captain - Boulder Creek Fire (Retired)
Board of Directors - Boulder Creek Fire Protection District (What was I
thinking?)

[Scott Lurndal]

Mad Hamish <***@iinet.unspamme.net.au> writes:
>On Tue, 20 Aug 2024 13:30:39 -0700, Bobbie Sellers
><***@mouse-potato.com> wrote:
>
>>On 8/20/24 08:51, Paul S Person wrote:
>>> On Mon, 19 Aug 2024 14:08:09 -0700, Bobbie Sellers
>>> <***@mouse-potato.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 8/19/24 01:06, D wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, 19 Aug 2024, quadibloc wrote:
>>>
>>> <snippo>
>>>
>>>>>> necessary public health measures against COVID-19, and he spewed lies
>>>>
>>>> Trump's mode of converse is to lie and lie again. He knew just
>>>> how bad the crisis of Covid 19 would be and he lied to the American
>>>> Public.
>>>
>>> He did much much worse -- he failed to use the opportunity to rally
>>> the nation behind him and be swept into office in 2020 by a landslide.
>>
>> He won the Electoral College and Hillary Clinton won the
>>popular vote.
>>
>Who landed on the moon first in your timeline?
>Because in this one he won the 2016 election against Hilary Clinton
>but lost the 2020 election to Joe Biden.

While that is true, it is also true that in 2016 the orange clown
lost the popular vote - he only won due to the electoral college.

In 2020 he lost both the popular vote and the electoral college.

[Paul S Person]

On Mon, 19 Aug 2024 06:35:08 +0000, quadibloc <***@gmail.com>
wrote:

>On Sun, 18 Aug 2024 16:21:26 +0000, Paul S Person wrote:
>> On Sat, 17 Aug 2024 21:52:07 +0200, D <***@example.net> wrote:
>>>What!?! Jesus Christ, do people never learn? When has freezing prices and
>>>forcing markets under political control ever benefitted anyone except,
>>>maybe, politicians?
>>>
>>>Sounds like the US is up for a huge left torn in case Cackles wins. But
>>>let's hope and pray that Trump wins. All else will be a huge disaster.
>
>A Trump victory is what would be a huge disaster.
>
>He denies the science of global warming; he interfered with states
>taking
>necessary public health measures against COVID-19, and he spewed lies
>about
>a stolen election that contributed to the January 6 insurrection.
>
>However, while grocery price-gouging makes a nice scapegoat... in
>Canada,
>we have a movement to boycott Loblaws, as if it's to blame for the rise
>in world food prices. Apparently people haven't noticed Russia invading
>Ukraine... which, of course, is another _big_ reason why a Trump win
>would be a disaster for the whole world.
>
>Kamala Harris should indeed stay away from policies that will be
>perceived
>in the U.S. as wild-eyed socialism. Particularly when indeed there is no
>need for them.
>
>> Still getting our Putin/Trump Talking Points from wherever, I see.
>>
>> I suggest getting a grip and consider Trump's telling his Christian
>> voters that this November is the last time they will ever need to
>> vote. Political nonsense, at best.
>
>At least this particular remark wasn't promising a one-party
>dictatorship.
>
>He was merely stating that he would shift what was normal so that
>evangelicals
>wouldn't feel pressure to vote, since America would be back where it was
>in the
>1950s, so neither party would pursue policies they found threatening.

That's his claim.

I think he is well-aware that, if he loses, he won't get another
chance. Even if he makes to November without ending up in a rubber
room in a straightjacket.

And, if he wins, since he is limited to two terms, he won't need any
voters, however rabid and loyal, any more.

Which means that, come what may, after the election he can do what he
likes and ignore their complaints because they will no longer be of
any use to him. Trump only does what helps himself, and they will be
irrelevant to that.

>Nonsense, yes. Moving the needle of what is considered 'normal' is not
>done in
>a single Presidential term.

It won't happen at all, even if he had 100 terms.

Look at the anti-demonstrators in Britain. That is, look at the
majority, not the crazed few.

And the 50's weren't what the people he was addressing think they
were. They were children then (as was I, that is, a child) and were
/shielded/ from the nastier aspects of the then-current reality. And
who wouldn't want to go back to a time when other people fed you and
housed you and coddled you and you had no responsibilities, as adults
have them, at all?
--
"Here lies the Tuscan poet Aretino,
Who evil spoke of everyone but God,
Giving as his excuse, 'I never knew him.'"

[Lynn McGuire]

On 8/19/2024 1:35 AM, quadibloc wrote:
> On Sun, 18 Aug 2024 16:21:26 +0000, Paul S Person wrote:
>> On Sat, 17 Aug 2024 21:52:07 +0200, D <***@example.net> wrote:
>>> What!?! Jesus Christ, do people never learn? When has freezing prices
>>> and
>>> forcing markets under political control ever benefitted anyone except,
>>> maybe, politicians?
>>>
>>> Sounds like the US is up for a huge left torn in case Cackles wins. But
>>> let's hope and pray that Trump wins. All else will be a huge disaster.
>
> A Trump victory is what would be a huge disaster.
>
> He denies the science of global warming; he interfered with states
> taking
> necessary public health measures against COVID-19, and he spewed lies
> about
> a stolen election that contributed to the January 6 insurrection.
>
> However, while grocery price-gouging makes a nice scapegoat... in
> Canada,
> we have a movement to boycott Loblaws, as if it's to blame for the rise
> in world food prices. Apparently people haven't noticed Russia invading
> Ukraine... which, of course, is another _big_ reason why a Trump win
> would be a disaster for the whole world.
>
> Kamala Harris should indeed stay away from policies that will be
> perceived
> in the U.S. as wild-eyed socialism. Particularly when indeed there is no
> need for them.
>
>> Still getting our Putin/Trump Talking Points from wherever, I see.
>>
>> I suggest getting a grip and consider Trump's telling his Christian
>> voters that this November is the last time they will ever need to
>> vote. Political nonsense, at best.
>
> At least this particular remark wasn't promising a one-party
> dictatorship.
>
> He was merely stating that he would shift what was normal so that
> evangelicals
> wouldn't feel pressure to vote, since America would be back where it was
> in the
> 1950s, so neither party would pursue policies they found threatening.
>
> Nonsense, yes. Moving the needle of what is considered 'normal' is not
> done in
> a single Presidential term.
>
> John Savard

Hey man, you really need to get back on your meds.

Lynn

[Bobbie Sellers]

On 8/17/24 12:52, D wrote:
>
>
> On Sat, 17 Aug 2024, Lynn McGuire wrote:
>
>> On 8/17/2024 4:51 AM, D wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, 16 Aug 2024, Lynn McGuire wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 8/16/2024 4:55 PM, William Hyde wrote:
>>>>> Lynn McGuire wrote:
>>>>>> On 8/16/2024 1:26 PM, BCFD 36 wrote:
>>>>>>> Awhile back, The Three Body Problem was mentioned. In that
>>>>>>> thread, there was no mention of the current Netflix version. Was
>>>>>>> this mentioned somewhere else and I just missed it? Google groups
>>>>>>> is of no help any more.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I have just started the series and I am intrigued, so far. Just
>>>>>>> two episodes. My wife is rather "meh" about it, but she said the
>>>>>>> same thing about Star Trek 1 which in reality she HATED so I may
>>>>>>> be watching it after she goes to bed.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ----------------
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Dave Scruggs
>>>>>>> Senior Software Engineer - Lockheed Martin, et. al (mostly Retired)
>>>>>>> Captain - Boulder Creek Fire (Retired)
>>>>>>> Board of Directors - Boulder Creek Fire Protection District (What
>>>>>>> was I thinking?)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I did not like the Netflix version, have yet to read the book.
>>>>>> Too much time spent on the China Cultural Revolution and their
>>>>>> violence against the educated.  Felt like a Children of the Corn
>>>>>> mini series.  I gave up after two episodes.
>>>>>
>>>>> I've known several people whose lives were damaged by that event.
>>>>> And these were the lucky ones, who made it to the west.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> One scientist I knew never got over it, especially the abuse
>>>>> suffered by her mother.  One might have expected her father, an
>>>>> educated man who had lived in the West and still had children
>>>>> living there to be as big a target. But he was left alone, she
>>>>> said, because he was a renowned gerontologist and  the Party
>>>>> leadership was getting older.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Another distinguished scientist told me he reached the last year of
>>>>> secondary education only to realize that he'd learned absolutely
>>>>> nothing owing to the constant meetings and demonstrations.
>>>>> Ignoring his teachers, he packed four years of school into one.
>>>>> Judging by his subsequent career, he kept up that level of effort
>>>>> for  the next few decades.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> William Hyde
>>>>
>>>> One of my Dad's mainland Chinese grad students from OU lived with us
>>>> for a couple of years from 1973 to 1974 and worked for my Dad from
>>>> 1973 to 1995. He came over to the USA in 1966 or 1967 and got a PhD
>>>> in Chemical Engineering from OU in 1973.  I heard enough stories
>>>> from him about growing on a farm in China, living in a cave,
>>>> starving all the time.  If our family did not eat everything at
>>>> supper then he would finish everything off.  It took my mother
>>>> several months break him of that habit.  But he never got fat.  He
>>>> never mentioned anything about the Cultural Revolution but I suspect
>>>> it was the reason why he left China.
>>>>
>>>> He was incredibly smart, he would give me an algorithm and I would
>>>> code it up in Fortran 66 for him in a subroutine and give him the
>>>> card deck. He was very submissive, he would never look you in the
>>>> face, would always look down.  He went back to mainland China in
>>>> 1995 to help with his sister's export business.  Sadly, he soon had
>>>> a heart attack and passed away.  His sister was kind enough to call
>>>> my father and tell us.
>>>>
>>>> I know several people in the USA who had to leave Iran when they had
>>>> their cultural revolution.  Mostly engineers working for USA
>>>> companies like Dupont in Iran.  I've gotten a few stories from them,
>>>> grim, very grim. One of my classmates at TAMU disappeared at the
>>>> midyear of our junior year in 1980 when the Iranian Embassy in the
>>>> USA sent him a letter cutting off his funds and ordering him to come
>>>> home.  They also revoked his visa but President Reagan gave all
>>>> those people green card status in 1981.  He refused to go home to
>>>> Iran since he was a nephew of the Shah, he figured that they would
>>>> shoot him the minute he stepped off the plane.
>>>>
>>>> In other words, the various Cultural Revolutions are a little too
>>>> real for me and I do not enjoy reading about or viewing them.
>>>>
>>>> Lynn
>>>>
>>>
>>> With this historical luggage I can never understand how people in
>>> europe can insist on voting for socialists. Give them enough power
>>> and they tend to repeat themselves. Just look at the socialist UK
>>> government now cracking down on free speech. Very sad.

The UK as someone points out does not have written guarantes
of Freedom of Speech as we do in the USA. The German government
specifically outlaws discussion of the benefits of the Hitler Years.
But that has not kept their own Fascist movement worshipping Hitler
to re-emerge.

There are socialist and Socialists and Marxist-Leninist as well
as Outright Fascists. Socialists with a small s run the US Military
forces. The Military is supposed to support and defend the Constitution
and they remain under the control of the elected Civilians sf the
Federal Government. Socialists with Capital S are seldom elected in
the USA but we have Bernie Sanders, who points out that he is a
Democratic Socialist i.e. he believes in voting for a Representative
government.

Fascists want the Industrial forces on their side and want
the people controlled, as do Marxist-Leninist parties except they
want the State which is claimed to represent the people to control
the means of production. So the primary means of production is
the ability of women to give birth to new humans and they want to
get as many humans as possible so restrict abortions.
In Communist China this control over births was used to
lower the population with unforeseen results result in modification
of the 1 child per family rule.
In Germany under Hitler, in Russia under Communism and now
under Putin, as well as China since the Communist drove the Nationalist
out as well as some smaller nations we have totalitarian Governments
which try to control the people in pursuit of Government set goals.

In ancient Rome and Greece as well a later states a fear of
Democracy developed calling it Mob-rule. Well they did not have
constitution but autocratic rule and the curious matter is that
they feared the mob voting itself benefits. Aristocratic Republics
eventually fell to the most powerful creating empires.
However in the USA today we have the most powerful economically
buying our elected representatives who vote them benefits greater than
any democratic government envisioned hand to the people of the USA.



>>
>> Incredibly sad.  And the Democrat candidate here in the USA is talking
>> freezing food prices and making grocery stores report any changes in
>> their prices, causing huge paperwork and never ending bureaucracies.
>>
>> Lynn
>>
Very popular with people spending most of their wages or stipends on
eating, shelter and utilities.

>
> What!?! Jesus Christ, do people never learn? When has freezing prices
> and forcing markets under political control ever benefitted anyone
> except, maybe, politicians?

WW II in the USA we suffered wage and price controls and beat
the hell out of the Germans. We also suffered food rationing and no
one died of that. We were a Totalitarian state and the pacifists
suffered but we only had Radio and Newspapers as a source of information
and apart from Columnists who hated the Roosevelts not much variation
in the War messages thrown at people. Those wartime cartoons targeting
the German Reich and the Japanese Imperial Armies were embarrassing by
the 1960s but guess what the Germans and the Japanese were treated
to the same demonizatins of the USA, UK, Netherlands, France and of
course the Portuguese all of whom had oppressed the people of the
Asia.

>
> Sounds like the US is up for a huge left torn in case Cackles wins. But
> let's hope and pray that Trump wins. All else will be a huge disaster.

A Trumps win would be a great disaster for poorer Americans, Europe and
Australian, Japan, Taiwan and the semi-democratic nations of
Asia. He knows nothing about the way the economy operates and thinks
Tariffs are good for the USA which they are not. Tariffs are good
for monied interests giving them carte blanche to charge as much
for their goods, imported or locally produced as the market will
bear. He thinks well of the most notorious autocrats like Putin
and Xi.

A left turn towards the Center and away from the Corporate Control that
had left millions unemployed and poorly fed at high
prices. Biden helped start policies that helped and Kamala Harris
and Tim Walz may help to continue that turn until we are on the
track of FDR and Elanor, Truman and Eisenhower. Even tricky Dick
Nixon thought of giving the people an guaranteed income.

I doubt very much that any billionaires will have to sell
their multiple homes or any of their luxurious Yachts unless
Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren are ever appointed or
Elected to positions of such power. The accumulation of wealth
by billionaires is usually quite bad for the economy as the
circulation of the money supply is supposed to be best for
the economy but the wealth of multi-Billionaires represents in
plain terms, Constipation of the money supply and the economy.

bliss

--
b l i s s - S F 4 e v e r at D S L E x t r e m e dot com

[Paul S Person]

On Sun, 18 Aug 2024 10:15:13 -0700, Bobbie Sellers
<***@mouse-potato.com> wrote:

>On 8/17/24 12:52, D wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Sat, 17 Aug 2024, Lynn McGuire wrote:
>>
>>> On 8/17/2024 4:51 AM, D wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, 16 Aug 2024, Lynn McGuire wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 8/16/2024 4:55 PM, William Hyde wrote:
>>>>>> Lynn McGuire wrote:
>>>>>>> On 8/16/2024 1:26 PM, BCFD 36 wrote:
>>>>>>>> Awhile back, The Three Body Problem was mentioned. In that
>>>>>>>> thread, there was no mention of the current Netflix version. Was
>>>>>>>> this mentioned somewhere else and I just missed it? Google groups
>>>>>>>> is of no help any more.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I have just started the series and I am intrigued, so far. Just
>>>>>>>> two episodes. My wife is rather "meh" about it, but she said the
>>>>>>>> same thing about Star Trek 1 which in reality she HATED so I may
>>>>>>>> be watching it after she goes to bed.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> ----------------
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Dave Scruggs
>>>>>>>> Senior Software Engineer - Lockheed Martin, et. al (mostly Retired)
>>>>>>>> Captain - Boulder Creek Fire (Retired)
>>>>>>>> Board of Directors - Boulder Creek Fire Protection District (What
>>>>>>>> was I thinking?)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I did not like the Netflix version, have yet to read the book.
>>>>>>> Too much time spent on the China Cultural Revolution and their
>>>>>>> violence against the educated.  Felt like a Children of the Corn
>>>>>>> mini series.  I gave up after two episodes.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I've known several people whose lives were damaged by that event.
>>>>>> And these were the lucky ones, who made it to the west.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> One scientist I knew never got over it, especially the abuse
>>>>>> suffered by her mother.  One might have expected her father, an
>>>>>> educated man who had lived in the West and still had children
>>>>>> living there to be as big a target. But he was left alone, she
>>>>>> said, because he was a renowned gerontologist and  the Party
>>>>>> leadership was getting older.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Another distinguished scientist told me he reached the last year of
>>>>>> secondary education only to realize that he'd learned absolutely
>>>>>> nothing owing to the constant meetings and demonstrations.
>>>>>> Ignoring his teachers, he packed four years of school into one.
>>>>>> Judging by his subsequent career, he kept up that level of effort
>>>>>> for  the next few decades.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> William Hyde
>>>>>
>>>>> One of my Dad's mainland Chinese grad students from OU lived with us
>>>>> for a couple of years from 1973 to 1974 and worked for my Dad from
>>>>> 1973 to 1995. He came over to the USA in 1966 or 1967 and got a PhD
>>>>> in Chemical Engineering from OU in 1973.  I heard enough stories
>>>>> from him about growing on a farm in China, living in a cave,
>>>>> starving all the time.  If our family did not eat everything at
>>>>> supper then he would finish everything off.  It took my mother
>>>>> several months break him of that habit.  But he never got fat.  He
>>>>> never mentioned anything about the Cultural Revolution but I suspect
>>>>> it was the reason why he left China.
>>>>>
>>>>> He was incredibly smart, he would give me an algorithm and I would
>>>>> code it up in Fortran 66 for him in a subroutine and give him the
>>>>> card deck. He was very submissive, he would never look you in the
>>>>> face, would always look down.  He went back to mainland China in
>>>>> 1995 to help with his sister's export business.  Sadly, he soon had
>>>>> a heart attack and passed away.  His sister was kind enough to call
>>>>> my father and tell us.
>>>>>
>>>>> I know several people in the USA who had to leave Iran when they had
>>>>> their cultural revolution.  Mostly engineers working for USA
>>>>> companies like Dupont in Iran.  I've gotten a few stories from them,
>>>>> grim, very grim. One of my classmates at TAMU disappeared at the
>>>>> midyear of our junior year in 1980 when the Iranian Embassy in the
>>>>> USA sent him a letter cutting off his funds and ordering him to come
>>>>> home.  They also revoked his visa but President Reagan gave all
>>>>> those people green card status in 1981.  He refused to go home to
>>>>> Iran since he was a nephew of the Shah, he figured that they would
>>>>> shoot him the minute he stepped off the plane.
>>>>>
>>>>> In other words, the various Cultural Revolutions are a little too
>>>>> real for me and I do not enjoy reading about or viewing them.
>>>>>
>>>>> Lynn
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> With this historical luggage I can never understand how people in
>>>> europe can insist on voting for socialists. Give them enough power
>>>> and they tend to repeat themselves. Just look at the socialist UK
>>>> government now cracking down on free speech. Very sad.
>
> The UK as someone points out does not have written guarantes
>of Freedom of Speech as we do in the USA. The German government
>specifically outlaws discussion of the benefits of the Hitler Years.
>But that has not kept their own Fascist movement worshipping Hitler
>to re-emerge.
>
> There are socialist and Socialists and Marxist-Leninist as well
>as Outright Fascists. Socialists with a small s run the US Military
>forces. The Military is supposed to support and defend the Constitution
>and they remain under the control of the elected Civilians sf the
>Federal Government. Socialists with Capital S are seldom elected in
>the USA but we have Bernie Sanders, who points out that he is a
>Democratic Socialist i.e. he believes in voting for a Representative
>government.
>
> Fascists want the Industrial forces on their side and want
>the people controlled, as do Marxist-Leninist parties except they
>want the State which is claimed to represent the people to control
>the means of production. So the primary means of production is
>the ability of women to give birth to new humans and they want to
>get as many humans as possible so restrict abortions.
> In Communist China this control over births was used to
>lower the population with unforeseen results result in modification
>of the 1 child per family rule.
> In Germany under Hitler, in Russia under Communism and now
>under Putin, as well as China since the Communist drove the Nationalist
>out as well as some smaller nations we have totalitarian Governments
>which try to control the people in pursuit of Government set goals.
>
> In ancient Rome and Greece as well a later states a fear of
>Democracy developed calling it Mob-rule. Well they did not have
>constitution but autocratic rule and the curious matter is that
>they feared the mob voting itself benefits. Aristocratic Republics
>eventually fell to the most powerful creating empires.
> However in the USA today we have the most powerful economically
>buying our elected representatives who vote them benefits greater than
>any democratic government envisioned hand to the people of the USA.
>
>
>
>>>
>>> Incredibly sad.  And the Democrat candidate here in the USA is talking
>>> freezing food prices and making grocery stores report any changes in
>>> their prices, causing huge paperwork and never ending bureaucracies.
>>>
>>> Lynn
>>>
> Very popular with people spending most of their wages or stipends on
>eating, shelter and utilities.
>
>>
>> What!?! Jesus Christ, do people never learn? When has freezing prices
>> and forcing markets under political control ever benefitted anyone
>> except, maybe, politicians?
>
> WW II in the USA we suffered wage and price controls and beat
>the hell out of the Germans. We also suffered food rationing and no
>one died of that. We were a Totalitarian state and the pacifists
>suffered but we only had Radio and Newspapers as a source of information
>and apart from Columnists who hated the Roosevelts not much variation
>in the War messages thrown at people. Those wartime cartoons targeting
>the German Reich and the Japanese Imperial Armies were embarrassing by
>the 1960s but guess what the Germans and the Japanese were treated
>to the same demonizatins of the USA, UK, Netherlands, France and of
>course the Portuguese all of whom had oppressed the people of the
>Asia.
>
>>
>> Sounds like the US is up for a huge left torn in case Cackles wins. But
>> let's hope and pray that Trump wins. All else will be a huge disaster.
>
> A Trumps win would be a great disaster for poorer Americans, Europe and
>Australian, Japan, Taiwan and the semi-democratic nations of
>Asia. He knows nothing about the way the economy operates and thinks
>Tariffs are good for the USA which they are not. Tariffs are good
>for monied interests giving them carte blanche to charge as much
>for their goods, imported or locally produced as the market will
>bear. He thinks well of the most notorious autocrats like Putin
>and Xi.
>
> A left turn towards the Center and away from the Corporate Control that
>had left millions unemployed and poorly fed at high
>prices. Biden helped start policies that helped and Kamala Harris
>and Tim Walz may help to continue that turn until we are on the
>track of FDR and Elanor, Truman and Eisenhower. Even tricky Dick
>Nixon thought of giving the people an guaranteed income.
>
> I doubt very much that any billionaires will have to sell
>their multiple homes or any of their luxurious Yachts unless
>Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren are ever appointed or
>Elected to positions of such power. The accumulation of wealth
>by billionaires is usually quite bad for the economy as the
>circulation of the money supply is supposed to be best for
>the economy but the wealth of multi-Billionaires represents in
>plain terms, Constipation of the money supply and the economy.

I recently read a book, written about 100 years ago, about the history
of the Lutheran Church in America.

When it got to the 1870-1910 period, the description was very much
what you have above: a few rich people with all the money, no way for
anyone else to advance, quality problems with food (the muckrakers
were active at the time) and so on. The result? A fair number of
Federal Agencies, antitrust laws, laws on food quality, and so on.
IOW, a vast expansion of Federal power. (The point in the book is that
the various Lutheran bodies began thinking along the same lines of
large-scale co-operation and even organization. Well, when they
weren't too busy sniping at each other, of course.)

Makes me wonder what the /current/ go-round with the problem will
produce.
--
"Here lies the Tuscan poet Aretino,
Who evil spoke of everyone but God,
Giving as his excuse, 'I never knew him.'"

[Paul S Person]

On Sat, 17 Aug 2024 13:42:46 -0500, Lynn McGuire
<***@gmail.com> wrote:

>On 8/17/2024 4:51 AM, D wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Fri, 16 Aug 2024, Lynn McGuire wrote:
>>
>>> On 8/16/2024 4:55 PM, William Hyde wrote:
>>>> Lynn McGuire wrote:
>>>>> On 8/16/2024 1:26 PM, BCFD 36 wrote:
>>>>>> Awhile back, The Three Body Problem was mentioned. In that thread,
>>>>>> there was no mention of the current Netflix version. Was this
>>>>>> mentioned somewhere else and I just missed it? Google groups is of
>>>>>> no help any more.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I have just started the series and I am intrigued, so far. Just two
>>>>>> episodes. My wife is rather "meh" about it, but she said the same
>>>>>> thing about Star Trek 1 which in reality she HATED so I may be
>>>>>> watching it after she goes to bed.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ----------------
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Dave Scruggs
>>>>>> Senior Software Engineer - Lockheed Martin, et. al (mostly Retired)
>>>>>> Captain - Boulder Creek Fire (Retired)
>>>>>> Board of Directors - Boulder Creek Fire Protection District (What
>>>>>> was I thinking?)
>>>>>
>>>>> I did not like the Netflix version, have yet to read the book.  Too
>>>>> much time spent on the China Cultural Revolution and their violence
>>>>> against the educated.  Felt like a Children of the Corn mini
>>>>> series.  I gave up after two episodes.
>>>>
>>>> I've known several people whose lives were damaged by that event.
>>>> And these were the lucky ones, who made it to the west.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> One scientist I knew never got over it, especially the abuse suffered
>>>> by her mother.  One might have expected her father, an educated man
>>>> who had lived in the West and still had children living there to be
>>>> as big a target. But he was left alone, she said, because he was a
>>>> renowned gerontologist and  the Party leadership was getting older.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Another distinguished scientist told me he reached the last year of
>>>> secondary education only to realize that he'd learned absolutely
>>>> nothing owing to the constant meetings and demonstrations.  Ignoring
>>>> his teachers, he packed four years of school into one.  Judging by
>>>> his subsequent career, he kept up that level of effort for  the next
>>>> few decades.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> William Hyde
>>>
>>> One of my Dad's mainland Chinese grad students from OU lived with us
>>> for a couple of years from 1973 to 1974 and worked for my Dad from
>>> 1973 to 1995. He came over to the USA in 1966 or 1967 and got a PhD in
>>> Chemical Engineering from OU in 1973.  I heard enough stories from him
>>> about growing on a farm in China, living in a cave, starving all the
>>> time.  If our family did not eat everything at supper then he would
>>> finish everything off.  It took my mother several months break him of
>>> that habit.  But he never got fat.  He never mentioned anything about
>>> the Cultural Revolution but I suspect it was the reason why he left
>>> China.
>>>
>>> He was incredibly smart, he would give me an algorithm and I would
>>> code it up in Fortran 66 for him in a subroutine and give him the card
>>> deck. He was very submissive, he would never look you in the face,
>>> would always look down.  He went back to mainland China in 1995 to
>>> help with his sister's export business.  Sadly, he soon had a heart
>>> attack and passed away.  His sister was kind enough to call my father
>>> and tell us.
>>>
>>> I know several people in the USA who had to leave Iran when they had
>>> their cultural revolution.  Mostly engineers working for USA companies
>>> like Dupont in Iran.  I've gotten a few stories from them, grim, very
>>> grim.  One of my classmates at TAMU disappeared at the midyear of our
>>> junior year in 1980 when the Iranian Embassy in the USA sent him a
>>> letter cutting off his funds and ordering him to come home.  They also
>>> revoked his visa but President Reagan gave all those people green card
>>> status in 1981.  He refused to go home to Iran since he was a nephew
>>> of the Shah, he figured that they would shoot him the minute he
>>> stepped off the plane.
>>>
>>> In other words, the various Cultural Revolutions are a little too real
>>> for me and I do not enjoy reading about or viewing them.
>>>
>>> Lynn
>>>
>>
>> With this historical luggage I can never understand how people in europe
>> can insist on voting for socialists. Give them enough power and they
>> tend to repeat themselves. Just look at the socialist UK government now
>> cracking down on free speech. Very sad.
>
>Incredibly sad. And the Democrat candidate here in the USA is talking
>freezing food prices and making grocery stores report any changes in
>their prices, causing huge paperwork and never ending bureaucracies.

The presumed Democratic candidate for President (she won't be the
candidate until the convention chooses her) appears to be talking
about artificially raising prices and keeping them raised far longer
than the economic situation requires. And I don't want to see a quote
from 5 years ago on the topic; people's ideas change over time.

I suspect you have happened on a Putin/Trump Talking Point and have
swallowed it whole. Surely by now you realize that these things are
useful only as projections onto the Dems of what Trump (and so the
Republicans, as long as they do not disavow him and all his works and
all his ways) would like to do. Which is fine in itself -- it's always
helpful to know what the other guys are planning.
--
"Here lies the Tuscan poet Aretino,
Who evil spoke of everyone but God,
Giving as his excuse, 'I never knew him.'"

[Lynn McGuire]

On 8/18/2024 11:19 AM, Paul S Person wrote:
> On Sat, 17 Aug 2024 13:42:46 -0500, Lynn McGuire
> <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On 8/17/2024 4:51 AM, D wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, 16 Aug 2024, Lynn McGuire wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 8/16/2024 4:55 PM, William Hyde wrote:
>>>>> Lynn McGuire wrote:
>>>>>> On 8/16/2024 1:26 PM, BCFD 36 wrote:
>>>>>>> Awhile back, The Three Body Problem was mentioned. In that thread,
>>>>>>> there was no mention of the current Netflix version. Was this
>>>>>>> mentioned somewhere else and I just missed it? Google groups is of
>>>>>>> no help any more.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I have just started the series and I am intrigued, so far. Just two
>>>>>>> episodes. My wife is rather "meh" about it, but she said the same
>>>>>>> thing about Star Trek 1 which in reality she HATED so I may be
>>>>>>> watching it after she goes to bed.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ----------------
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Dave Scruggs
>>>>>>> Senior Software Engineer - Lockheed Martin, et. al (mostly Retired)
>>>>>>> Captain - Boulder Creek Fire (Retired)
>>>>>>> Board of Directors - Boulder Creek Fire Protection District (What
>>>>>>> was I thinking?)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I did not like the Netflix version, have yet to read the book.  Too
>>>>>> much time spent on the China Cultural Revolution and their violence
>>>>>> against the educated.  Felt like a Children of the Corn mini
>>>>>> series.  I gave up after two episodes.
>>>>>
>>>>> I've known several people whose lives were damaged by that event.
>>>>> And these were the lucky ones, who made it to the west.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> One scientist I knew never got over it, especially the abuse suffered
>>>>> by her mother.  One might have expected her father, an educated man
>>>>> who had lived in the West and still had children living there to be
>>>>> as big a target. But he was left alone, she said, because he was a
>>>>> renowned gerontologist and  the Party leadership was getting older.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Another distinguished scientist told me he reached the last year of
>>>>> secondary education only to realize that he'd learned absolutely
>>>>> nothing owing to the constant meetings and demonstrations.  Ignoring
>>>>> his teachers, he packed four years of school into one.  Judging by
>>>>> his subsequent career, he kept up that level of effort for  the next
>>>>> few decades.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> William Hyde
>>>>
>>>> One of my Dad's mainland Chinese grad students from OU lived with us
>>>> for a couple of years from 1973 to 1974 and worked for my Dad from
>>>> 1973 to 1995. He came over to the USA in 1966 or 1967 and got a PhD in
>>>> Chemical Engineering from OU in 1973.  I heard enough stories from him
>>>> about growing on a farm in China, living in a cave, starving all the
>>>> time.  If our family did not eat everything at supper then he would
>>>> finish everything off.  It took my mother several months break him of
>>>> that habit.  But he never got fat.  He never mentioned anything about
>>>> the Cultural Revolution but I suspect it was the reason why he left
>>>> China.
>>>>
>>>> He was incredibly smart, he would give me an algorithm and I would
>>>> code it up in Fortran 66 for him in a subroutine and give him the card
>>>> deck. He was very submissive, he would never look you in the face,
>>>> would always look down.  He went back to mainland China in 1995 to
>>>> help with his sister's export business.  Sadly, he soon had a heart
>>>> attack and passed away.  His sister was kind enough to call my father
>>>> and tell us.
>>>>
>>>> I know several people in the USA who had to leave Iran when they had
>>>> their cultural revolution.  Mostly engineers working for USA companies
>>>> like Dupont in Iran.  I've gotten a few stories from them, grim, very
>>>> grim.  One of my classmates at TAMU disappeared at the midyear of our
>>>> junior year in 1980 when the Iranian Embassy in the USA sent him a
>>>> letter cutting off his funds and ordering him to come home.  They also
>>>> revoked his visa but President Reagan gave all those people green card
>>>> status in 1981.  He refused to go home to Iran since he was a nephew
>>>> of the Shah, he figured that they would shoot him the minute he
>>>> stepped off the plane.
>>>>
>>>> In other words, the various Cultural Revolutions are a little too real
>>>> for me and I do not enjoy reading about or viewing them.
>>>>
>>>> Lynn
>>>>
>>>
>>> With this historical luggage I can never understand how people in europe
>>> can insist on voting for socialists. Give them enough power and they
>>> tend to repeat themselves. Just look at the socialist UK government now
>>> cracking down on free speech. Very sad.
>>
>> Incredibly sad. And the Democrat candidate here in the USA is talking
>> freezing food prices and making grocery stores report any changes in
>> their prices, causing huge paperwork and never ending bureaucracies.
>
> The presumed Democratic candidate for President (she won't be the
> candidate until the convention chooses her) appears to be talking
> about artificially raising prices and keeping them raised far longer
> than the economic situation requires. And I don't want to see a quote
> from 5 years ago on the topic; people's ideas change over time.
>
> I suspect you have happened on a Putin/Trump Talking Point and have
> swallowed it whole. Surely by now you realize that these things are
> useful only as projections onto the Dems of what Trump (and so the
> Republicans, as long as they do not disavow him and all his works and
> all his ways) would like to do. Which is fine in itself -- it's always
> helpful to know what the other guys are planning.

Please do not lie about me. This Aug 16, 2024 speech by Kamala Harris
on Price Fixing is on CNN:

https://www.cnn.com/2024/08/16/business/harris-price-gouging-ban-inflation/index.html

"New York CNN — Food prices have surged by more than 20% under the
Biden-Harris administration, leaving many voters eager to stretch their
dollars further at the grocery store."

"On Friday, Vice President Kamala Harris said she has a solution: a
federal ban on price gouging across the food industry."

Lynn

[D]

On Sun, 18 Aug 2024, Lynn McGuire wrote:

> On 8/18/2024 11:19 AM, Paul S Person wrote:
>> On Sat, 17 Aug 2024 13:42:46 -0500, Lynn McGuire
>> <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 8/17/2024 4:51 AM, D wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, 16 Aug 2024, Lynn McGuire wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 8/16/2024 4:55 PM, William Hyde wrote:
>>>>>> Lynn McGuire wrote:
>>>>>>> On 8/16/2024 1:26 PM, BCFD 36 wrote:
>>>>>>>> Awhile back, The Three Body Problem was mentioned. In that thread,
>>>>>>>> there was no mention of the current Netflix version. Was this
>>>>>>>> mentioned somewhere else and I just missed it? Google groups is of
>>>>>>>> no help any more.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I have just started the series and I am intrigued, so far. Just two
>>>>>>>> episodes. My wife is rather "meh" about it, but she said the same
>>>>>>>> thing about Star Trek 1 which in reality she HATED so I may be
>>>>>>>> watching it after she goes to bed.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> ----------------
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Dave Scruggs
>>>>>>>> Senior Software Engineer - Lockheed Martin, et. al (mostly Retired)
>>>>>>>> Captain - Boulder Creek Fire (Retired)
>>>>>>>> Board of Directors - Boulder Creek Fire Protection District (What
>>>>>>>> was I thinking?)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I did not like the Netflix version, have yet to read the book.  Too
>>>>>>> much time spent on the China Cultural Revolution and their violence
>>>>>>> against the educated.  Felt like a Children of the Corn mini
>>>>>>> series.  I gave up after two episodes.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I've known several people whose lives were damaged by that event.
>>>>>> And these were the lucky ones, who made it to the west.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> One scientist I knew never got over it, especially the abuse suffered
>>>>>> by her mother.  One might have expected her father, an educated man
>>>>>> who had lived in the West and still had children living there to be
>>>>>> as big a target. But he was left alone, she said, because he was a
>>>>>> renowned gerontologist and  the Party leadership was getting older.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Another distinguished scientist told me he reached the last year of
>>>>>> secondary education only to realize that he'd learned absolutely
>>>>>> nothing owing to the constant meetings and demonstrations.  Ignoring
>>>>>> his teachers, he packed four years of school into one.  Judging by
>>>>>> his subsequent career, he kept up that level of effort for  the next
>>>>>> few decades.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> William Hyde
>>>>>
>>>>> One of my Dad's mainland Chinese grad students from OU lived with us
>>>>> for a couple of years from 1973 to 1974 and worked for my Dad from
>>>>> 1973 to 1995. He came over to the USA in 1966 or 1967 and got a PhD in
>>>>> Chemical Engineering from OU in 1973.  I heard enough stories from him
>>>>> about growing on a farm in China, living in a cave, starving all the
>>>>> time.  If our family did not eat everything at supper then he would
>>>>> finish everything off.  It took my mother several months break him of
>>>>> that habit.  But he never got fat.  He never mentioned anything about
>>>>> the Cultural Revolution but I suspect it was the reason why he left
>>>>> China.
>>>>>
>>>>> He was incredibly smart, he would give me an algorithm and I would
>>>>> code it up in Fortran 66 for him in a subroutine and give him the card
>>>>> deck. He was very submissive, he would never look you in the face,
>>>>> would always look down.  He went back to mainland China in 1995 to
>>>>> help with his sister's export business.  Sadly, he soon had a heart
>>>>> attack and passed away.  His sister was kind enough to call my father
>>>>> and tell us.
>>>>>
>>>>> I know several people in the USA who had to leave Iran when they had
>>>>> their cultural revolution.  Mostly engineers working for USA companies
>>>>> like Dupont in Iran.  I've gotten a few stories from them, grim, very
>>>>> grim.  One of my classmates at TAMU disappeared at the midyear of our
>>>>> junior year in 1980 when the Iranian Embassy in the USA sent him a
>>>>> letter cutting off his funds and ordering him to come home.  They also
>>>>> revoked his visa but President Reagan gave all those people green card
>>>>> status in 1981.  He refused to go home to Iran since he was a nephew
>>>>> of the Shah, he figured that they would shoot him the minute he
>>>>> stepped off the plane.
>>>>>
>>>>> In other words, the various Cultural Revolutions are a little too real
>>>>> for me and I do not enjoy reading about or viewing them.
>>>>>
>>>>> Lynn
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> With this historical luggage I can never understand how people in europe
>>>> can insist on voting for socialists. Give them enough power and they
>>>> tend to repeat themselves. Just look at the socialist UK government now
>>>> cracking down on free speech. Very sad.
>>>
>>> Incredibly sad. And the Democrat candidate here in the USA is talking
>>> freezing food prices and making grocery stores report any changes in
>>> their prices, causing huge paperwork and never ending bureaucracies.
>>
>> The presumed Democratic candidate for President (she won't be the
>> candidate until the convention chooses her) appears to be talking
>> about artificially raising prices and keeping them raised far longer
>> than the economic situation requires. And I don't want to see a quote
>> from 5 years ago on the topic; people's ideas change over time.
>>
>> I suspect you have happened on a Putin/Trump Talking Point and have
>> swallowed it whole. Surely by now you realize that these things are
>> useful only as projections onto the Dems of what Trump (and so the
>> Republicans, as long as they do not disavow him and all his works and
>> all his ways) would like to do. Which is fine in itself -- it's always
>> helpful to know what the other guys are planning.
>
> Please do not lie about me. This Aug 16, 2024 speech by Kamala Harris on
> Price Fixing is on CNN:
> https://www.cnn.com/2024/08/16/business/harris-price-gouging-ban-inflation/index.html
>
> "New York CNN — Food prices have surged by more than 20% under the
> Biden-Harris administration, leaving many voters eager to stretch their
> dollars further at the grocery store."
>
> "On Friday, Vice President Kamala Harris said she has a solution: a federal
> ban on price gouging across the food industry."
>
> Lynn
>

Sorry Paul, it's there black on white. Let me give you an example of what
can happen when the government fixes prices. When I was young, the
socialist state of sweden I was living in had one phone company. During me
BBS intense youth that could lead to phone bills in the 100s of dollars.
The socialists were proud of their government monopoly. Oh, and note that
in the beginning only the governmetn approved phone was allowed, so no
choice for you.

Then along came Jan Stenbeck, a capitalist hero who blew apart the
government monopolies on TV and phones. The socialists cried, they fought,
they ridiculed, threatened but in the end, the drive of this great man was
bigger than socialism, and he managed to start his own private company.

Today, as a result, I pay about 9.50 USD per month for unlimited minutes
and unlimited messages and 10 GB of data. This is due to capitalism.

My experience is that only people who have _never_ lived with the evils of
socialism are the only ones who are in favour of it. Everyone I know who
has experienced swedish socialism (unless they are working for the public
sector of course) or even worse, the ones who experienced soviet style
socialism, is against it.

It can never work and it will never work, and it has been proven
historically to be so, and scientifically as well.

Please, for the love of god, abandon those ideas. They only bring death
and destruction in the end, unless you are a socialist and end up on top.
But in that case, as Venezuela teaches us, the 99% will starve.

[Paul S Person]

On Mon, 19 Aug 2024 00:00:02 +0200, D <***@example.net> wrote:

>
>
>On Sun, 18 Aug 2024, Lynn McGuire wrote:
>
>> On 8/18/2024 11:19 AM, Paul S Person wrote:
>>> On Sat, 17 Aug 2024 13:42:46 -0500, Lynn McGuire
>>> <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Incredibly sad. And the Democrat candidate here in the USA is talking
>>>> freezing food prices and making grocery stores report any changes in
>>>> their prices, causing huge paperwork and never ending bureaucracies.
>>>
>>> The presumed Democratic candidate for President (she won't be the
>>> candidate until the convention chooses her) appears to be talking
>>> about artificially raising prices and keeping them raised far longer
>>> than the economic situation requires. And I don't want to see a quote
>>> from 5 years ago on the topic; people's ideas change over time.
>>>
>>> I suspect you have happened on a Putin/Trump Talking Point and have
>>> swallowed it whole. Surely by now you realize that these things are
>>> useful only as projections onto the Dems of what Trump (and so the
>>> Republicans, as long as they do not disavow him and all his works and
>>> all his ways) would like to do. Which is fine in itself -- it's always
>>> helpful to know what the other guys are planning.
>>
>> Please do not lie about me. This Aug 16, 2024 speech by Kamala Harris on
>> Price Fixing is on CNN:
>> https://www.cnn.com/2024/08/16/business/harris-price-gouging-ban-inflation/index.html
>>
>> "New York CNN — Food prices have surged by more than 20% under the
>> Biden-Harris administration, leaving many voters eager to stretch their
>> dollars further at the grocery store."
>>
>> "On Friday, Vice President Kamala Harris said she has a solution: a federal
>> ban on price gouging across the food industry."
>>
>> Lynn
>>
>
>Sorry Paul, it's there black on white. Let me give you an example of what
>can happen when the government fixes prices. When I was young, the
>socialist state of sweden I was living in had one phone company. During me
>BBS intense youth that could lead to phone bills in the 100s of dollars.
>The socialists were proud of their government monopoly. Oh, and note that
>in the beginning only the governmetn approved phone was allowed, so no
>choice for you.

Yes, indeed:

-- excerpts from article begin
“My plan will include new penalties for opportunistic companies that
exploit crises and break the rules,” Harris said at a campaign event.

To his point, a campaign fact sheet said that Harris also plans to
make more resources available for “the federal government to identify
and take on price-fixing and other anti-competitive practices in the
food and grocery industries.”
-- excerpts from article end

Not "freezing food prices and making grocery stores report any changes
in their prices", as claimed above.

So, yes, there it is in black and white -- this article does /not/
support the Trump/Putin talking point that she will be "freezing food
prices and making grocery stores report any changes in their prices".

There is a clear difference between Putin/Trump talking points and
reality. I suggest you consider checking on the facts. Or at least
reading the articles you claim support the position you are defending
to ensure that they do, in fact, do so.

All she is promising to do is /actually enforce the laws/. I can
remember when the Republican Party was the Party of Law and Order.

But no more.

(If this post actually produces a confirming article from a credible
news source, then this post will have served a purpose.)
--
"Here lies the Tuscan poet Aretino,
Who evil spoke of everyone but God,
Giving as his excuse, 'I never knew him.'"

[D]

On Mon, 19 Aug 2024, Paul S Person wrote:

> On Mon, 19 Aug 2024 00:00:02 +0200, D <***@example.net> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Sun, 18 Aug 2024, Lynn McGuire wrote:
>>
>>> On 8/18/2024 11:19 AM, Paul S Person wrote:
>>>> On Sat, 17 Aug 2024 13:42:46 -0500, Lynn McGuire
>>>> <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> Incredibly sad. And the Democrat candidate here in the USA is talking
>>>>> freezing food prices and making grocery stores report any changes in
>>>>> their prices, causing huge paperwork and never ending bureaucracies.
>>>>
>>>> The presumed Democratic candidate for President (she won't be the
>>>> candidate until the convention chooses her) appears to be talking
>>>> about artificially raising prices and keeping them raised far longer
>>>> than the economic situation requires. And I don't want to see a quote
>>>> from 5 years ago on the topic; people's ideas change over time.
>>>>
>>>> I suspect you have happened on a Putin/Trump Talking Point and have
>>>> swallowed it whole. Surely by now you realize that these things are
>>>> useful only as projections onto the Dems of what Trump (and so the
>>>> Republicans, as long as they do not disavow him and all his works and
>>>> all his ways) would like to do. Which is fine in itself -- it's always
>>>> helpful to know what the other guys are planning.
>>>
>>> Please do not lie about me. This Aug 16, 2024 speech by Kamala Harris on
>>> Price Fixing is on CNN:
>>> https://www.cnn.com/2024/08/16/business/harris-price-gouging-ban-inflation/index.html
>>>
>>> "New York CNN — Food prices have surged by more than 20% under the
>>> Biden-Harris administration, leaving many voters eager to stretch their
>>> dollars further at the grocery store."
>>>
>>> "On Friday, Vice President Kamala Harris said she has a solution: a federal
>>> ban on price gouging across the food industry."
>>>
>>> Lynn
>>>
>>
>> Sorry Paul, it's there black on white. Let me give you an example of what
>> can happen when the government fixes prices. When I was young, the
>> socialist state of sweden I was living in had one phone company. During me
>> BBS intense youth that could lead to phone bills in the 100s of dollars.
>> The socialists were proud of their government monopoly. Oh, and note that
>> in the beginning only the governmetn approved phone was allowed, so no
>> choice for you.
>
> Yes, indeed:
>
> -- excerpts from article begin
> “My plan will include new penalties for opportunistic companies that
> exploit crises and break the rules,” Harris said at a campaign event.
>
> To his point, a campaign fact sheet said that Harris also plans to
> make more resources available for “the federal government to identify
> and take on price-fixing and other anti-competitive practices in the
> food and grocery industries.”
> -- excerpts from article end
>
> Not "freezing food prices and making grocery stores report any changes
> in their prices", as claimed above.
>
> So, yes, there it is in black and white -- this article does /not/
> support the Trump/Putin talking point that she will be "freezing food
> prices and making grocery stores report any changes in their prices".
>
> There is a clear difference between Putin/Trump talking points and
> reality. I suggest you consider checking on the facts. Or at least
> reading the articles you claim support the position you are defending
> to ensure that they do, in fact, do so.
>
> All she is promising to do is /actually enforce the laws/. I can
> remember when the Republican Party was the Party of Law and Order.
>
> But no more.
>
> (If this post actually produces a confirming article from a credible
> news source, then this post will have served a purpose.)
>

Shall we continue?

From the same text...

" There’s just one issue: Harris’ proposal could create more problems than
the one it’s trying to solve, some economists say.

Gavin Roberts studied anti-price gouging laws some states passed during
the pandemic. One of the biggest effects he observed, especially at
grocery stores, was that these laws motivated people “to go buy goods more
than they would if prices had risen.”
A customer refuels a vehicle at a Mobil gas station in Los Angeles,
California, US, on Tuesday, April 2, 2024.

When prices are high, in most cases, the best policy action in response is
actually taking no action, Roberts, the chair of Weber State University’s
economics department, told CNN.

You are incorrect. I was also commenting on Lynn, please stick to that.

[Paul S Person]

On Mon, 19 Aug 2024 19:54:16 +0200, D <***@example.net> wrote:

>
>
>On Mon, 19 Aug 2024, Paul S Person wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 19 Aug 2024 00:00:02 +0200, D <***@example.net> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sun, 18 Aug 2024, Lynn McGuire wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 8/18/2024 11:19 AM, Paul S Person wrote:
>>>>> On Sat, 17 Aug 2024 13:42:46 -0500, Lynn McGuire
>>>>> <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> Incredibly sad. And the Democrat candidate here in the USA is talking
>>>>>> freezing food prices and making grocery stores report any changes in
>>>>>> their prices, causing huge paperwork and never ending bureaucracies.
>>>>>
>>>>> The presumed Democratic candidate for President (she won't be the
>>>>> candidate until the convention chooses her) appears to be talking
>>>>> about artificially raising prices and keeping them raised far longer
>>>>> than the economic situation requires. And I don't want to see a quote
>>>>> from 5 years ago on the topic; people's ideas change over time.
>>>>>
>>>>> I suspect you have happened on a Putin/Trump Talking Point and have
>>>>> swallowed it whole. Surely by now you realize that these things are
>>>>> useful only as projections onto the Dems of what Trump (and so the
>>>>> Republicans, as long as they do not disavow him and all his works and
>>>>> all his ways) would like to do. Which is fine in itself -- it's always
>>>>> helpful to know what the other guys are planning.
>>>>
>>>> Please do not lie about me. This Aug 16, 2024 speech by Kamala Harris on
>>>> Price Fixing is on CNN:
>>>> https://www.cnn.com/2024/08/16/business/harris-price-gouging-ban-inflation/index.html
>>>>
>>>> "New York CNN — Food prices have surged by more than 20% under the
>>>> Biden-Harris administration, leaving many voters eager to stretch their
>>>> dollars further at the grocery store."
>>>>
>>>> "On Friday, Vice President Kamala Harris said she has a solution: a federal
>>>> ban on price gouging across the food industry."
>>>>
>>>> Lynn
>>>>
>>>
>>> Sorry Paul, it's there black on white. Let me give you an example of what
>>> can happen when the government fixes prices. When I was young, the
>>> socialist state of sweden I was living in had one phone company. During me
>>> BBS intense youth that could lead to phone bills in the 100s of dollars.
>>> The socialists were proud of their government monopoly. Oh, and note that
>>> in the beginning only the governmetn approved phone was allowed, so no
>>> choice for you.
>>
>> Yes, indeed:
>>
>> -- excerpts from article begin
>> “My plan will include new penalties for opportunistic companies that
>> exploit crises and break the rules,” Harris said at a campaign event.
>>
>> To his point, a campaign fact sheet said that Harris also plans to
>> make more resources available for “the federal government to identify
>> and take on price-fixing and other anti-competitive practices in the
>> food and grocery industries.”
>> -- excerpts from article end
>>
>> Not "freezing food prices and making grocery stores report any changes
>> in their prices", as claimed above.
>>
>> So, yes, there it is in black and white -- this article does /not/
>> support the Trump/Putin talking point that she will be "freezing food
>> prices and making grocery stores report any changes in their prices".
>>
>> There is a clear difference between Putin/Trump talking points and
>> reality. I suggest you consider checking on the facts. Or at least
>> reading the articles you claim support the position you are defending
>> to ensure that they do, in fact, do so.
>>
>> All she is promising to do is /actually enforce the laws/. I can
>> remember when the Republican Party was the Party of Law and Order.
>>
>> But no more.
>>
>> (If this post actually produces a confirming article from a credible
>> news source, then this post will have served a purpose.)
>>
>
>Shall we continue?
>
>From the same text...
>
>" There’s just one issue: Harris’ proposal could create more problems than
>the one it’s trying to solve, some economists say.
>
>Gavin Roberts studied anti-price gouging laws some states passed during
>the pandemic. One of the biggest effects he observed, especially at
>grocery stores, was that these laws motivated people “to go buy goods more
>than they would if prices had risen.”
>A customer refuels a vehicle at a Mobil gas station in Los Angeles,
>California, US, on Tuesday, April 2, 2024.
>
>When prices are high, in most cases, the best policy action in response is
>actually taking no action, Roberts, the chair of Weber State University’s
>economics department, told CNN.

Which also has /nothing/ to do with "freezing food prices and making
grocery stores report any changes in their prices".

>You are incorrect. I was also commenting on Lynn, please stick to that.

I am correct. Please stick to the topic and stop trying to help Lynn
escape the consequences of his TPPT addiction.
--
"Here lies the Tuscan poet Aretino,
Who evil spoke of everyone but God,
Giving as his excuse, 'I never knew him.'"

[D]

On Tue, 20 Aug 2024, Paul S Person wrote:

> On Mon, 19 Aug 2024 19:54:16 +0200, D <***@example.net> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, 19 Aug 2024, Paul S Person wrote:
>>
>>> On Mon, 19 Aug 2024 00:00:02 +0200, D <***@example.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Sun, 18 Aug 2024, Lynn McGuire wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 8/18/2024 11:19 AM, Paul S Person wrote:
>>>>>> On Sat, 17 Aug 2024 13:42:46 -0500, Lynn McGuire
>>>>>> <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> Incredibly sad. And the Democrat candidate here in the USA is talking
>>>>>>> freezing food prices and making grocery stores report any changes in
>>>>>>> their prices, causing huge paperwork and never ending bureaucracies.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The presumed Democratic candidate for President (she won't be the
>>>>>> candidate until the convention chooses her) appears to be talking
>>>>>> about artificially raising prices and keeping them raised far longer
>>>>>> than the economic situation requires. And I don't want to see a quote
>>>>>> from 5 years ago on the topic; people's ideas change over time.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I suspect you have happened on a Putin/Trump Talking Point and have
>>>>>> swallowed it whole. Surely by now you realize that these things are
>>>>>> useful only as projections onto the Dems of what Trump (and so the
>>>>>> Republicans, as long as they do not disavow him and all his works and
>>>>>> all his ways) would like to do. Which is fine in itself -- it's always
>>>>>> helpful to know what the other guys are planning.
>>>>>
>>>>> Please do not lie about me. This Aug 16, 2024 speech by Kamala Harris on
>>>>> Price Fixing is on CNN:
>>>>> https://www.cnn.com/2024/08/16/business/harris-price-gouging-ban-inflation/index.html
>>>>>
>>>>> "New York CNN — Food prices have surged by more than 20% under the
>>>>> Biden-Harris administration, leaving many voters eager to stretch their
>>>>> dollars further at the grocery store."
>>>>>
>>>>> "On Friday, Vice President Kamala Harris said she has a solution: a federal
>>>>> ban on price gouging across the food industry."
>>>>>
>>>>> Lynn
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Sorry Paul, it's there black on white. Let me give you an example of what
>>>> can happen when the government fixes prices. When I was young, the
>>>> socialist state of sweden I was living in had one phone company. During me
>>>> BBS intense youth that could lead to phone bills in the 100s of dollars.
>>>> The socialists were proud of their government monopoly. Oh, and note that
>>>> in the beginning only the governmetn approved phone was allowed, so no
>>>> choice for you.
>>>
>>> Yes, indeed:
>>>
>>> -- excerpts from article begin
>>> “My plan will include new penalties for opportunistic companies that
>>> exploit crises and break the rules,” Harris said at a campaign event.
>>>
>>> To his point, a campaign fact sheet said that Harris also plans to
>>> make more resources available for “the federal government to identify
>>> and take on price-fixing and other anti-competitive practices in the
>>> food and grocery industries.”
>>> -- excerpts from article end
>>>
>>> Not "freezing food prices and making grocery stores report any changes
>>> in their prices", as claimed above.
>>>
>>> So, yes, there it is in black and white -- this article does /not/
>>> support the Trump/Putin talking point that she will be "freezing food
>>> prices and making grocery stores report any changes in their prices".
>>>
>>> There is a clear difference between Putin/Trump talking points and
>>> reality. I suggest you consider checking on the facts. Or at least
>>> reading the articles you claim support the position you are defending
>>> to ensure that they do, in fact, do so.
>>>
>>> All she is promising to do is /actually enforce the laws/. I can
>>> remember when the Republican Party was the Party of Law and Order.
>>>
>>> But no more.
>>>
>>> (If this post actually produces a confirming article from a credible
>>> news source, then this post will have served a purpose.)
>>>
>>
>> Shall we continue?
>>
>> From the same text...
>>
>> " There’s just one issue: Harris’ proposal could create more problems than
>> the one it’s trying to solve, some economists say.
>>
>> Gavin Roberts studied anti-price gouging laws some states passed during
>> the pandemic. One of the biggest effects he observed, especially at
>> grocery stores, was that these laws motivated people “to go buy goods more
>> than they would if prices had risen.”
>> A customer refuels a vehicle at a Mobil gas station in Los Angeles,
>> California, US, on Tuesday, April 2, 2024.
>>
>> When prices are high, in most cases, the best policy action in response is
>> actually taking no action, Roberts, the chair of Weber State University’s
>> economics department, told CNN.
>
> Which also has /nothing/ to do with "freezing food prices and making
> grocery stores report any changes in their prices".
>
>> You are incorrect. I was also commenting on Lynn, please stick to that.
>
> I am correct. Please stick to the topic and stop trying to help Lynn
> escape the consequences of his TPPT addiction.
>

No Paul, you are wrong here. Any common sense interpretation of that text
makes it obvious that Lynn is right and you are wrong.

[Bobbie Sellers]

On 8/20/24 11:38, D wrote:

Full of crap.

Big snip of unwanted verbiage

>
> No Paul, you are wrong here. Any common sense interpretation of that
> text makes it obvious that Lynn is right and you are wrong.

Your policies went of favor in the Great Depression of the
1930s. Hoover had an attitude like yours and felt it was not part
of his responsibility to do anything to alleviate the economic
woes brought on by the hands off economic policies then used by the
Federal Government. Of course as it mostly does unwise investments
tanked the economy.

bliss

--
b l i s s - S F 4 e v e r at D S L E x t r e m e dot com

[Scott Lurndal]

D <***@example.net> writes:
> This message is in MIME format. The first part should be readable text,
> while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools.

Please don't use MIME on usenet.


>>>>> On Sun, 18 Aug 2024, Lynn McGuire wrote:

>>>>>> "On Friday, Vice President Kamala Harris said she has a solution: a federal
>>>>>> ban on price gouging across the food industry."

>> Which also has /nothing/ to do with "freezing food prices and making
>> grocery stores report any changes in their prices".
>>
>>> You are incorrect. I was also commenting on Lynn, please stick to that.
>>
>> I am correct. Please stick to the topic and stop trying to help Lynn
>> escape the consequences of his TPPT addiction.
>>
>
>No Paul, you are wrong here. Any common sense interpretation of that text
>makes it obvious that Lynn is right and you are wrong.

Paul is correct. A ban on price gouging is _not_ the same as
price controls.

One might even go so far as suggesting that the inability of the
federal government to enforce the anti-trust laws have increased
the frequency of price gouging. Particularly in the grocery
industry which has overly consolidated over since 1980.

[D]

On Tue, 20 Aug 2024, Scott Lurndal wrote:

> D <***@example.net> writes:
>> This message is in MIME format. The first part should be readable text,
>> while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools.
>
> Please don't use MIME on usenet.
>
>
>>>>>> On Sun, 18 Aug 2024, Lynn McGuire wrote:
>
>>>>>>> "On Friday, Vice President Kamala Harris said she has a solution: a federal
>>>>>>> ban on price gouging across the food industry."
>
>>> Which also has /nothing/ to do with "freezing food prices and making
>>> grocery stores report any changes in their prices".
>>>
>>>> You are incorrect. I was also commenting on Lynn, please stick to that.
>>>
>>> I am correct. Please stick to the topic and stop trying to help Lynn
>>> escape the consequences of his TPPT addiction.
>>>
>>
>> No Paul, you are wrong here. Any common sense interpretation of that text
>> makes it obvious that Lynn is right and you are wrong.
>
> Paul is correct. A ban on price gouging is _not_ the same as
> price controls.
>
> One might even go so far as suggesting that the inability of the
> federal government to enforce the anti-trust laws have increased
> the frequency of price gouging. Particularly in the grocery
> industry which has overly consolidated over since 1980.
>

You are incorrect. Let's have a look at the definitions:

Price control:

"Restriction on maximum prices that is established and maintained by the
government (as during periods of war or inflation)."

Price gouging:

"The act of or an instance of charging services or pricing goods at
unreasonably high prices."

wordnik.com

If I, as a company, cannot set my prices freely, my price is controlled.
Price control means that the government restrict the ability of business
to control its price.

[Cryptoengineer]

On 8/21/2024 3:02 AM, D wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, 20 Aug 2024, Scott Lurndal wrote:
>
>> D <***@example.net> writes:
>>>  This message is in MIME format.  The first part should be readable
>>> text,
>>>  while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware
>>> tools.
>>
>> Please don't use MIME on usenet.
>>
>>
>>>>>>> On Sun, 18 Aug 2024, Lynn McGuire wrote:
>>
>>>>>>>> "On Friday, Vice President Kamala Harris said she has a
>>>>>>>> solution: a federal
>>>>>>>> ban on price gouging across the food industry."
>>
>>>> Which also has /nothing/ to do with "freezing food prices and making
>>>> grocery stores report any changes in their prices".
>>>>
>>>>> You are incorrect. I was also commenting on Lynn, please stick to
>>>>> that.
>>>>
>>>> I am correct. Please stick to the topic and stop trying to help Lynn
>>>> escape the consequences of his TPPT addiction.
>>>>
>>>
>>> No Paul, you are wrong here. Any common sense interpretation of that
>>> text
>>> makes it obvious that Lynn is right and you are wrong.
>>
>> Paul is correct.   A ban on price gouging is _not_ the same as
>> price controls.
>>
>> One might even go so far as suggesting that the inability of the
>> federal government to enforce the anti-trust laws have increased
>> the frequency of price gouging.  Particularly in the grocery
>> industry which has overly consolidated over since 1980.
>>
>
> You are incorrect. Let's have a look at the definitions:
>
> Price control:
>
> "Restriction on maximum prices that is established and maintained by the
> government (as during periods of war or inflation)."
>
> Price gouging:
>
> "The act of or an instance of charging services or pricing goods at
> unreasonably high prices."
>
> wordnik.com
>
> If I, as a company, cannot set my prices freely, my price is controlled.
> Price control means that the government restrict the ability of business
> to control its price.

We really don't know the details of Harris's plan, so speculation is
speculative.

If you, as a company, take advantage of a temporary situation to raise
your profit margin on say, a bottle of water from 100% to 1000% due
to being in a hurricane zone, that's gouging.

Again, we're in the dark about what Harris is actually proposing.
I'm very skeptical over price controls, but we need to find out what she
is actually thinking.

pt

[D]

On Wed, 21 Aug 2024, Cryptoengineer wrote:

> On 8/21/2024 3:02 AM, D wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Tue, 20 Aug 2024, Scott Lurndal wrote:
>>
>>> D <***@example.net> writes:
>>>>  This message is in MIME format.  The first part should be readable text,
>>>>  while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware
>>>> tools.
>>>
>>> Please don't use MIME on usenet.
>>>
>>>
>>>>>>>> On Sun, 18 Aug 2024, Lynn McGuire wrote:
>>>
>>>>>>>>> "On Friday, Vice President Kamala Harris said she has a solution: a
>>>>>>>>> federal
>>>>>>>>> ban on price gouging across the food industry."
>>>
>>>>> Which also has /nothing/ to do with "freezing food prices and making
>>>>> grocery stores report any changes in their prices".
>>>>>
>>>>>> You are incorrect. I was also commenting on Lynn, please stick to that.
>>>>>
>>>>> I am correct. Please stick to the topic and stop trying to help Lynn
>>>>> escape the consequences of his TPPT addiction.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> No Paul, you are wrong here. Any common sense interpretation of that text
>>>> makes it obvious that Lynn is right and you are wrong.
>>>
>>> Paul is correct.   A ban on price gouging is _not_ the same as
>>> price controls.
>>>
>>> One might even go so far as suggesting that the inability of the
>>> federal government to enforce the anti-trust laws have increased
>>> the frequency of price gouging.  Particularly in the grocery
>>> industry which has overly consolidated over since 1980.
>>>
>>
>> You are incorrect. Let's have a look at the definitions:
>>
>> Price control:
>>
>> "Restriction on maximum prices that is established and maintained by the
>> government (as during periods of war or inflation)."
>>
>> Price gouging:
>>
>> "The act of or an instance of charging services or pricing goods at
>> unreasonably high prices."
>>
>> wordnik.com
>>
>> If I, as a company, cannot set my prices freely, my price is controlled.
>> Price control means that the government restrict the ability of business to
>> control its price.
>
> We really don't know the details of Harris's plan, so speculation is
> speculative.
>
> If you, as a company, take advantage of a temporary situation to raise
> your profit margin on say, a bottle of water from 100% to 1000% due
> to being in a hurricane zone, that's gouging.
>
> Again, we're in the dark about what Harris is actually proposing.
> I'm very skeptical over price controls, but we need to find out what she
> is actually thinking.
>
> pt
>

I agree with this. Let's wait for further information and a winner can
then be declared. ;)

[Lynn McGuire]

On 8/21/2024 7:35 AM, Cryptoengineer wrote:
> On 8/21/2024 3:02 AM, D wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Tue, 20 Aug 2024, Scott Lurndal wrote:
>>
>>> D <***@example.net> writes:
>>>>  This message is in MIME format.  The first part should be readable
>>>> text,
>>>>  while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware
>>>> tools.
>>>
>>> Please don't use MIME on usenet.
>>>
>>>
>>>>>>>> On Sun, 18 Aug 2024, Lynn McGuire wrote:
>>>
>>>>>>>>> "On Friday, Vice President Kamala Harris said she has a
>>>>>>>>> solution: a federal
>>>>>>>>> ban on price gouging across the food industry."
>>>
>>>>> Which also has /nothing/ to do with "freezing food prices and making
>>>>> grocery stores report any changes in their prices".
>>>>>
>>>>>> You are incorrect. I was also commenting on Lynn, please stick to
>>>>>> that.
>>>>>
>>>>> I am correct. Please stick to the topic and stop trying to help Lynn
>>>>> escape the consequences of his TPPT addiction.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> No Paul, you are wrong here. Any common sense interpretation of that
>>>> text
>>>> makes it obvious that Lynn is right and you are wrong.
>>>
>>> Paul is correct.   A ban on price gouging is _not_ the same as
>>> price controls.
>>>
>>> One might even go so far as suggesting that the inability of the
>>> federal government to enforce the anti-trust laws have increased
>>> the frequency of price gouging.  Particularly in the grocery
>>> industry which has overly consolidated over since 1980.
>>>
>>
>> You are incorrect. Let's have a look at the definitions:
>>
>> Price control:
>>
>> "Restriction on maximum prices that is established and maintained by
>> the government (as during periods of war or inflation)."
>>
>> Price gouging:
>>
>> "The act of or an instance of charging services or pricing goods at
>> unreasonably high prices."
>>
>> wordnik.com
>>
>> If I, as a company, cannot set my prices freely, my price is
>> controlled. Price control means that the government restrict the
>> ability of business to control its price.
>
> We really don't know the details of Harris's plan, so speculation is
> speculative.
>
> If you, as a company, take advantage of a temporary situation to raise
> your profit margin on say, a bottle of water from 100% to 1000% due
> to being in a hurricane zone, that's gouging.
>
> Again, we're in the dark about what Harris is actually proposing.
> I'm very skeptical over price controls, but we need to find out what she
> is actually thinking.
>
> pt

We will know when the grocery store shelves start going empty.

Lynn

[Dimensional Traveler]

On 8/21/2024 2:50 PM, Lynn McGuire wrote:
> On 8/21/2024 7:35 AM, Cryptoengineer wrote:
>> On 8/21/2024 3:02 AM, D wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, 20 Aug 2024, Scott Lurndal wrote:
>>>
>>>> D <***@example.net> writes:
>>>>>  This message is in MIME format.  The first part should be readable
>>>>> text,
>>>>>  while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware
>>>>> tools.
>>>>
>>>> Please don't use MIME on usenet.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 18 Aug 2024, Lynn McGuire wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> "On Friday, Vice President Kamala Harris said she has a
>>>>>>>>>> solution: a federal
>>>>>>>>>> ban on price gouging across the food industry."
>>>>
>>>>>> Which also has /nothing/ to do with "freezing food prices and making
>>>>>> grocery stores report any changes in their prices".
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> You are incorrect. I was also commenting on Lynn, please stick to
>>>>>>> that.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I am correct. Please stick to the topic and stop trying to help Lynn
>>>>>> escape the consequences of his TPPT addiction.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> No Paul, you are wrong here. Any common sense interpretation of
>>>>> that text
>>>>> makes it obvious that Lynn is right and you are wrong.
>>>>
>>>> Paul is correct.   A ban on price gouging is _not_ the same as
>>>> price controls.
>>>>
>>>> One might even go so far as suggesting that the inability of the
>>>> federal government to enforce the anti-trust laws have increased
>>>> the frequency of price gouging.  Particularly in the grocery
>>>> industry which has overly consolidated over since 1980.
>>>>
>>>
>>> You are incorrect. Let's have a look at the definitions:
>>>
>>> Price control:
>>>
>>> "Restriction on maximum prices that is established and maintained by
>>> the government (as during periods of war or inflation)."
>>>
>>> Price gouging:
>>>
>>> "The act of or an instance of charging services or pricing goods at
>>> unreasonably high prices."
>>>
>>> wordnik.com
>>>
>>> If I, as a company, cannot set my prices freely, my price is
>>> controlled. Price control means that the government restrict the
>>> ability of business to control its price.
>>
>> We really don't know the details of Harris's plan, so speculation is
>> speculative.
>>
>> If you, as a company, take advantage of a temporary situation to raise
>> your profit margin on say, a bottle of water from 100% to 1000% due
>> to being in a hurricane zone, that's gouging.
>>
>> Again, we're in the dark about what Harris is actually proposing.
>> I'm very skeptical over price controls, but we need to find out what she
>> is actually thinking.
>>
>> pt
>
> We will know when the grocery store shelves start going empty.
>
You failed to notice that happening under Trump obviously.

--
I've done good in this world. Now I'm tired and just want to be a cranky
dirty old man.

[Robert Woodward]

In article <va61n2$2c62$***@dont-email.me>,
Dimensional Traveler <***@sonic.net> wrote:

> On 8/21/2024 2:50 PM, Lynn McGuire wrote:
> > On 8/21/2024 7:35 AM, Cryptoengineer wrote:
> >> On 8/21/2024 3:02 AM, D wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Tue, 20 Aug 2024, Scott Lurndal wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> D <***@example.net> writes:
> >>>>>  This message is in MIME format.  The first part should be readable
> >>>>> text,
> >>>>>  while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware
> >>>>> tools.
> >>>>
> >>>> Please don't use MIME on usenet.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>>>>> On Sun, 18 Aug 2024, Lynn McGuire wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> "On Friday, Vice President Kamala Harris said she has a
> >>>>>>>>>> solution: a federal
> >>>>>>>>>> ban on price gouging across the food industry."
> >>>>
> >>>>>> Which also has /nothing/ to do with "freezing food prices and making
> >>>>>> grocery stores report any changes in their prices".
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> You are incorrect. I was also commenting on Lynn, please stick to
> >>>>>>> that.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I am correct. Please stick to the topic and stop trying to help Lynn
> >>>>>> escape the consequences of his TPPT addiction.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> No Paul, you are wrong here. Any common sense interpretation of
> >>>>> that text
> >>>>> makes it obvious that Lynn is right and you are wrong.
> >>>>
> >>>> Paul is correct.   A ban on price gouging is _not_ the same as
> >>>> price controls.
> >>>>
> >>>> One might even go so far as suggesting that the inability of the
> >>>> federal government to enforce the anti-trust laws have increased
> >>>> the frequency of price gouging.  Particularly in the grocery
> >>>> industry which has overly consolidated over since 1980.
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> You are incorrect. Let's have a look at the definitions:
> >>>
> >>> Price control:
> >>>
> >>> "Restriction on maximum prices that is established and maintained by
> >>> the government (as during periods of war or inflation)."
> >>>
> >>> Price gouging:
> >>>
> >>> "The act of or an instance of charging services or pricing goods at
> >>> unreasonably high prices."
> >>>
> >>> wordnik.com
> >>>
> >>> If I, as a company, cannot set my prices freely, my price is
> >>> controlled. Price control means that the government restrict the
> >>> ability of business to control its price.
> >>
> >> We really don't know the details of Harris's plan, so speculation is
> >> speculative.
> >>
> >> If you, as a company, take advantage of a temporary situation to raise
> >> your profit margin on say, a bottle of water from 100% to 1000% due
> >> to being in a hurricane zone, that's gouging.
> >>
> >> Again, we're in the dark about what Harris is actually proposing.
> >> I'm very skeptical over price controls, but we need to find out what she
> >> is actually thinking.
> >>
> >> pt
> >
> > We will know when the grocery store shelves start going empty.
> >
> You failed to notice that happening under Trump obviously.

I never noticed a problem with grocery (or retail in general) store
stocking until February 2020. Some stores haven't yet completely
recovered.

--
"We have advanced to new and surprising levels of bafflement."
Imperial Auditor Miles Vorkosigan describes progress in _Komarr_.
—-----------------------------------------------------
Robert Woodward ***@drizzle.com

[Lynn McGuire]

On 8/22/2024 12:07 AM, Robert Woodward wrote:
...
>>>> If you, as a company, take advantage of a temporary situation to raise
>>>> your profit margin on say, a bottle of water from 100% to 1000% due
>>>> to being in a hurricane zone, that's gouging.
>>>>
>>>> Again, we're in the dark about what Harris is actually proposing.
>>>> I'm very skeptical over price controls, but we need to find out what she
>>>> is actually thinking.
>>>>
>>>> pt
>>>
>>> We will know when the grocery store shelves start going empty.
>>>
>> You failed to notice that happening under Trump obviously.
>
> I never noticed a problem with grocery (or retail in general) store
> stocking until February 2020. Some stores haven't yet completely
> recovered.

All of the stores in my area are full of stuff. But the stores that
were getting 3 or 4 eighteen wheelers a day to restock with at night are
now getting 8 or 9 eighteen wheelers a day. My buddy who is in charge
of stocking our HEB has double the people to restock the store with now.
They even rebuilt the stocking area to have more cages for delayed
stocking so they can restock during the day now. They never did that
before 2021 other than the third party vendors.

People are stacking canned goods and water like crazy so the stores are
having to restock like crazy. People know tough times are coming. I
advise you to do the same.

If things turn out ok then you can donate the canned goods to your local
food bank. They always have customers, even in the good times. But I
would not be in a hurry.

These are the good old days. We will call the coming days "The Greater
Depression".

Lynn

[Bobbie Sellers]

On 8/21/24 22:07, Robert Woodward wrote:
> In article <va61n2$2c62$***@dont-email.me>,
> Dimensional Traveler <***@sonic.net> wrote:
>
>> On 8/21/2024 2:50 PM, Lynn McGuire wrote:
>>> On 8/21/2024 7:35 AM, Cryptoengineer wrote:
>>>> On 8/21/2024 3:02 AM, D wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, 20 Aug 2024, Scott Lurndal wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> D <***@example.net> writes:
>>>>>>>  This message is in MIME format.  The first part should be readable
>>>>>>> text,
>>>>>>>  while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware
>>>>>>> tools.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Please don't use MIME on usenet.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 18 Aug 2024, Lynn McGuire wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> "On Friday, Vice President Kamala Harris said she has a
>>>>>>>>>>>> solution: a federal
>>>>>>>>>>>> ban on price gouging across the food industry."
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Which also has /nothing/ to do with "freezing food prices and making
>>>>>>>> grocery stores report any changes in their prices".
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> You are incorrect. I was also commenting on Lynn, please stick to
>>>>>>>>> that.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I am correct. Please stick to the topic and stop trying to help Lynn
>>>>>>>> escape the consequences of his TPPT addiction.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> No Paul, you are wrong here. Any common sense interpretation of
>>>>>>> that text
>>>>>>> makes it obvious that Lynn is right and you are wrong.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Paul is correct.   A ban on price gouging is _not_ the same as
>>>>>> price controls.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> One might even go so far as suggesting that the inability of the
>>>>>> federal government to enforce the anti-trust laws have increased
>>>>>> the frequency of price gouging.  Particularly in the grocery
>>>>>> industry which has overly consolidated over since 1980.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> You are incorrect. Let's have a look at the definitions:
>>>>>
>>>>> Price control:
>>>>>
>>>>> "Restriction on maximum prices that is established and maintained by
>>>>> the government (as during periods of war or inflation)."
>>>>>
>>>>> Price gouging:
>>>>>
>>>>> "The act of or an instance of charging services or pricing goods at
>>>>> unreasonably high prices."
>>>>>
>>>>> wordnik.com
>>>>>
>>>>> If I, as a company, cannot set my prices freely, my price is
>>>>> controlled. Price control means that the government restrict the
>>>>> ability of business to control its price.
>>>>
>>>> We really don't know the details of Harris's plan, so speculation is
>>>> speculative.
>>>>
>>>> If you, as a company, take advantage of a temporary situation to raise
>>>> your profit margin on say, a bottle of water from 100% to 1000% due
>>>> to being in a hurricane zone, that's gouging.
>>>>
>>>> Again, we're in the dark about what Harris is actually proposing.
>>>> I'm very skeptical over price controls, but we need to find out what she
>>>> is actually thinking.
>>>>
>>>> pt
>>>
>>> We will know when the grocery store shelves start going empty.
>>>
>> You failed to notice that happening under Trump obviously.
>
> I never noticed a problem with grocery (or retail in general) store
> stocking until February 2020. Some stores haven't yet completely
> recovered.
>
Well since March 19 2020 we had a worldwide pandemic and
it was necessary to curtail employee exposures and even trucking
businesses slowed down. Then due to rw advice frem #45 and the
likes of QAnon, a lot of poeple died, some were truckers. Meantime
cargo ships were anchored in San Francisco Bay waiting for personnel
to assemble to transfer cargo in spite of restrictions and the
trucks to carry the goods away to the markets. I imagine the scene
was the same or more so on the East Coast and Gulf ports.

In San Francisco the closing of the office buildings
wiped out the small shops catering to them and to the businesses
in which they were employed. Lots of local folks lost there
work as things closed down. San Francisco has not quite recovered
though it is definitely doing better. Still lots of opportunity
in San Francisco as lots of prime retail and offic space is
available. And Employers are calling the office personnel
to come to the office more often despite their work from home
performance.

bliss
--
b l i s s - S F 4 e v e r at D S L E x t r e m e dot com

[Paul S Person]

On Wed, 21 Aug 2024 23:59:13 -0700, Bobbie Sellers
<***@mouse-potato.com> wrote:

>On 8/21/24 22:07, Robert Woodward wrote:
>> In article <va61n2$2c62$***@dont-email.me>,
>> Dimensional Traveler <***@sonic.net> wrote:
>>
>>> On 8/21/2024 2:50 PM, Lynn McGuire wrote:
>>>> On 8/21/2024 7:35 AM, Cryptoengineer wrote:
>>>>> On 8/21/2024 3:02 AM, D wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tue, 20 Aug 2024, Scott Lurndal wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> D <***@example.net> writes:
>>>>>>>>  This message is in MIME format.  The first part should be readable
>>>>>>>> text,
>>>>>>>>  while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware
>>>>>>>> tools.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Please don't use MIME on usenet.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 18 Aug 2024, Lynn McGuire wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> "On Friday, Vice President Kamala Harris said she has a
>>>>>>>>>>>>> solution: a federal
>>>>>>>>>>>>> ban on price gouging across the food industry."
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Which also has /nothing/ to do with "freezing food prices and making
>>>>>>>>> grocery stores report any changes in their prices".
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> You are incorrect. I was also commenting on Lynn, please stick to
>>>>>>>>>> that.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I am correct. Please stick to the topic and stop trying to help Lynn
>>>>>>>>> escape the consequences of his TPPT addiction.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> No Paul, you are wrong here. Any common sense interpretation of
>>>>>>>> that text
>>>>>>>> makes it obvious that Lynn is right and you are wrong.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Paul is correct.   A ban on price gouging is _not_ the same as
>>>>>>> price controls.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> One might even go so far as suggesting that the inability of the
>>>>>>> federal government to enforce the anti-trust laws have increased
>>>>>>> the frequency of price gouging.  Particularly in the grocery
>>>>>>> industry which has overly consolidated over since 1980.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You are incorrect. Let's have a look at the definitions:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Price control:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Restriction on maximum prices that is established and maintained by
>>>>>> the government (as during periods of war or inflation)."
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Price gouging:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "The act of or an instance of charging services or pricing goods at
>>>>>> unreasonably high prices."
>>>>>>
>>>>>> wordnik.com
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If I, as a company, cannot set my prices freely, my price is
>>>>>> controlled. Price control means that the government restrict the
>>>>>> ability of business to control its price.
>>>>>
>>>>> We really don't know the details of Harris's plan, so speculation is
>>>>> speculative.
>>>>>
>>>>> If you, as a company, take advantage of a temporary situation to raise
>>>>> your profit margin on say, a bottle of water from 100% to 1000% due
>>>>> to being in a hurricane zone, that's gouging.
>>>>>
>>>>> Again, we're in the dark about what Harris is actually proposing.
>>>>> I'm very skeptical over price controls, but we need to find out what she
>>>>> is actually thinking.
>>>>>
>>>>> pt
>>>>
>>>> We will know when the grocery store shelves start going empty.
>>>>
>>> You failed to notice that happening under Trump obviously.
>>
>> I never noticed a problem with grocery (or retail in general) store
>> stocking until February 2020. Some stores haven't yet completely
>> recovered.
>>
> Well since March 19 2020 we had a worldwide pandemic and
>it was necessary to curtail employee exposures and even trucking
>businesses slowed down. Then due to rw advice frem #45 and the
>likes of QAnon, a lot of poeple died, some were truckers. Meantime
>cargo ships were anchored in San Francisco Bay waiting for personnel
>to assemble to transfer cargo in spite of restrictions and the
>trucks to carry the goods away to the markets. I imagine the scene
>was the same or more so on the East Coast and Gulf ports.
>
> In San Francisco the closing of the office buildings
>wiped out the small shops catering to them and to the businesses
>in which they were employed. Lots of local folks lost there
>work as things closed down. San Francisco has not quite recovered
>though it is definitely doing better. Still lots of opportunity
>in San Francisco as lots of prime retail and offic space is
>available. And Employers are calling the office personnel
>to come to the office more often despite their work from home
>performance.

Or perhaps /because/ of their work from home performance, who can say?
--
"Here lies the Tuscan poet Aretino,
Who evil spoke of everyone but God,
Giving as his excuse, 'I never knew him.'"

[Dimensional Traveler]

On 8/22/2024 8:18 AM, Paul S Person wrote:
> On Wed, 21 Aug 2024 23:59:13 -0700, Bobbie Sellers
> <***@mouse-potato.com> wrote:
>
>> On 8/21/24 22:07, Robert Woodward wrote:
>>> In article <va61n2$2c62$***@dont-email.me>,
>>> Dimensional Traveler <***@sonic.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 8/21/2024 2:50 PM, Lynn McGuire wrote:
>>>>> On 8/21/2024 7:35 AM, Cryptoengineer wrote:
>>>>>> On 8/21/2024 3:02 AM, D wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Tue, 20 Aug 2024, Scott Lurndal wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> D <***@example.net> writes:
>>>>>>>>>  This message is in MIME format.  The first part should be readable
>>>>>>>>> text,
>>>>>>>>>  while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware
>>>>>>>>> tools.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Please don't use MIME on usenet.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 18 Aug 2024, Lynn McGuire wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "On Friday, Vice President Kamala Harris said she has a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> solution: a federal
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ban on price gouging across the food industry."
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Which also has /nothing/ to do with "freezing food prices and making
>>>>>>>>>> grocery stores report any changes in their prices".
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> You are incorrect. I was also commenting on Lynn, please stick to
>>>>>>>>>>> that.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I am correct. Please stick to the topic and stop trying to help Lynn
>>>>>>>>>> escape the consequences of his TPPT addiction.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> No Paul, you are wrong here. Any common sense interpretation of
>>>>>>>>> that text
>>>>>>>>> makes it obvious that Lynn is right and you are wrong.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Paul is correct.   A ban on price gouging is _not_ the same as
>>>>>>>> price controls.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> One might even go so far as suggesting that the inability of the
>>>>>>>> federal government to enforce the anti-trust laws have increased
>>>>>>>> the frequency of price gouging.  Particularly in the grocery
>>>>>>>> industry which has overly consolidated over since 1980.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> You are incorrect. Let's have a look at the definitions:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Price control:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "Restriction on maximum prices that is established and maintained by
>>>>>>> the government (as during periods of war or inflation)."
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Price gouging:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "The act of or an instance of charging services or pricing goods at
>>>>>>> unreasonably high prices."
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> wordnik.com
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If I, as a company, cannot set my prices freely, my price is
>>>>>>> controlled. Price control means that the government restrict the
>>>>>>> ability of business to control its price.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> We really don't know the details of Harris's plan, so speculation is
>>>>>> speculative.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If you, as a company, take advantage of a temporary situation to raise
>>>>>> your profit margin on say, a bottle of water from 100% to 1000% due
>>>>>> to being in a hurricane zone, that's gouging.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Again, we're in the dark about what Harris is actually proposing.
>>>>>> I'm very skeptical over price controls, but we need to find out what she
>>>>>> is actually thinking.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> pt
>>>>>
>>>>> We will know when the grocery store shelves start going empty.
>>>>>
>>>> You failed to notice that happening under Trump obviously.
>>>
>>> I never noticed a problem with grocery (or retail in general) store
>>> stocking until February 2020. Some stores haven't yet completely
>>> recovered.
>>>
>> Well since March 19 2020 we had a worldwide pandemic and
>> it was necessary to curtail employee exposures and even trucking
>> businesses slowed down. Then due to rw advice frem #45 and the
>> likes of QAnon, a lot of poeple died, some were truckers. Meantime
>> cargo ships were anchored in San Francisco Bay waiting for personnel
>> to assemble to transfer cargo in spite of restrictions and the
>> trucks to carry the goods away to the markets. I imagine the scene
>> was the same or more so on the East Coast and Gulf ports.
>>
>> In San Francisco the closing of the office buildings
>> wiped out the small shops catering to them and to the businesses
>> in which they were employed. Lots of local folks lost there
>> work as things closed down. San Francisco has not quite recovered
>> though it is definitely doing better. Still lots of opportunity
>> in San Francisco as lots of prime retail and offic space is
>> available. And Employers are calling the office personnel
>> to come to the office more often despite their work from home
>> performance.
>
> Or perhaps /because/ of their work from home performance, who can say?

Actually a lot of the Return To Office mandates are attempts to lose
workers without the stigma of "layoffs".


--
I've done good in this world. Now I'm tired and just want to be a cranky
dirty old man.

[Lynn McGuire]

On 8/21/2024 7:45 PM, Dimensional Traveler wrote:
...
>>> We really don't know the details of Harris's plan, so speculation is
>>> speculative.
>>>
>>> If you, as a company, take advantage of a temporary situation to raise
>>> your profit margin on say, a bottle of water from 100% to 1000% due
>>> to being in a hurricane zone, that's gouging.
>>>
>>> Again, we're in the dark about what Harris is actually proposing.
>>> I'm very skeptical over price controls, but we need to find out what she
>>> is actually thinking.
>>>
>>> pt
>>
>> We will know when the grocery store shelves start going empty.
>>
> You failed to notice that happening under Trump obviously.

You ain't seen nothing yet. Start stacking canned goods and water.
Tough times are coming when they do not have anything to restock the
stores with.

Lynn

[Chris Buckley]

On 2024-08-22, Dimensional Traveler <***@sonic.net> wrote:
> On 8/21/2024 2:50 PM, Lynn McGuire wrote:
>> On 8/21/2024 7:35 AM, Cryptoengineer wrote:
>>> We really don't know the details of Harris's plan, so speculation is
>>> speculative.
>>>
>>> If you, as a company, take advantage of a temporary situation to raise
>>> your profit margin on say, a bottle of water from 100% to 1000% due
>>> to being in a hurricane zone, that's gouging.
>>>
>>> Again, we're in the dark about what Harris is actually proposing.
>>> I'm very skeptical over price controls, but we need to find out what she
>>> is actually thinking.
>>>
>>> pt
>>
>> We will know when the grocery store shelves start going empty.
>>
> You failed to notice that happening under Trump obviously.

And??

I am still awaiting even a single citation to the appropriate numerous
studies proving price gouging by supermarkets that you claimed existed.

Chris

[Cryptoengineer]

On 8/21/2024 5:50 PM, Lynn McGuire wrote:
> On 8/21/2024 7:35 AM, Cryptoengineer wrote:
>> On 8/21/2024 3:02 AM, D wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, 20 Aug 2024, Scott Lurndal wrote:
>>>
>>>> D <***@example.net> writes:
>>>>>  This message is in MIME format.  The first part should be readable
>>>>> text,
>>>>>  while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware
>>>>> tools.
>>>>
>>>> Please don't use MIME on usenet.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 18 Aug 2024, Lynn McGuire wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> "On Friday, Vice President Kamala Harris said she has a
>>>>>>>>>> solution: a federal
>>>>>>>>>> ban on price gouging across the food industry."
>>>>
>>>>>> Which also has /nothing/ to do with "freezing food prices and making
>>>>>> grocery stores report any changes in their prices".
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> You are incorrect. I was also commenting on Lynn, please stick to
>>>>>>> that.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I am correct. Please stick to the topic and stop trying to help Lynn
>>>>>> escape the consequences of his TPPT addiction.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> No Paul, you are wrong here. Any common sense interpretation of
>>>>> that text
>>>>> makes it obvious that Lynn is right and you are wrong.
>>>>
>>>> Paul is correct.   A ban on price gouging is _not_ the same as
>>>> price controls.
>>>>
>>>> One might even go so far as suggesting that the inability of the
>>>> federal government to enforce the anti-trust laws have increased
>>>> the frequency of price gouging.  Particularly in the grocery
>>>> industry which has overly consolidated over since 1980.
>>>>
>>>
>>> You are incorrect. Let's have a look at the definitions:
>>>
>>> Price control:
>>>
>>> "Restriction on maximum prices that is established and maintained by
>>> the government (as during periods of war or inflation)."
>>>
>>> Price gouging:
>>>
>>> "The act of or an instance of charging services or pricing goods at
>>> unreasonably high prices."
>>>
>>> wordnik.com
>>>
>>> If I, as a company, cannot set my prices freely, my price is
>>> controlled. Price control means that the government restrict the
>>> ability of business to control its price.
>>
>> We really don't know the details of Harris's plan, so speculation is
>> speculative.
>>
>> If you, as a company, take advantage of a temporary situation to raise
>> your profit margin on say, a bottle of water from 100% to 1000% due
>> to being in a hurricane zone, that's gouging.
>>
>> Again, we're in the dark about what Harris is actually proposing.
>> I'm very skeptical over price controls, but we need to find out what she
>> is actually thinking.
>>
>> pt
>
> We will know when the grocery store shelves start going empty.

That would be a clue, yes. Lets hope the policy doesn't lead to that.
Neither of us actually know what her plan entails.

pt

[Paul S Person]

On Tue, 20 Aug 2024 20:48:43 GMT, ***@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal)
wrote:

>D <***@example.net> writes:
>> This message is in MIME format. The first part should be readable text,
>> while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools.
>
>Please don't use MIME on usenet.
>
>
>>>>>> On Sun, 18 Aug 2024, Lynn McGuire wrote:
>
>>>>>>> "On Friday, Vice President Kamala Harris said she has a solution: a federal
>>>>>>> ban on price gouging across the food industry."
>
>>> Which also has /nothing/ to do with "freezing food prices and making
>>> grocery stores report any changes in their prices".
>>>
>>>> You are incorrect. I was also commenting on Lynn, please stick to that.
>>>
>>> I am correct. Please stick to the topic and stop trying to help Lynn
>>> escape the consequences of his TPPT addiction.
>>>
>>
>>No Paul, you are wrong here. Any common sense interpretation of that text
>>makes it obvious that Lynn is right and you are wrong.
>
>Paul is correct. A ban on price gouging is _not_ the same as
>price controls.
>
>One might even go so far as suggesting that the inability of the
>federal government to enforce the anti-trust laws have increased
>the frequency of price gouging. Particularly in the grocery
>industry which has overly consolidated over since 1980.

I noted elsewhere that what should have been an unrelated book
reminded me how much of the Federal control was put into place in a
era very much like our own. Anti-trust laws, food content regulation,
associated laws and associated Federal agencies stem from those times.

Perhaps this is the first glimmer of what further Federal controls and
even agencies will be added /this/ time around.

1%-ers, it seems, never learn.
--
"Here lies the Tuscan poet Aretino,
Who evil spoke of everyone but God,
Giving as his excuse, 'I never knew him.'"

[Lynn McGuire]

On 8/21/2024 10:41 AM, Paul S Person wrote:
...
>>> No Paul, you are wrong here. Any common sense interpretation of that text
>>> makes it obvious that Lynn is right and you are wrong.
>>
>> Paul is correct. A ban on price gouging is _not_ the same as
>> price controls.
>>
>> One might even go so far as suggesting that the inability of the
>> federal government to enforce the anti-trust laws have increased
>> the frequency of price gouging. Particularly in the grocery
>> industry which has overly consolidated over since 1980.
>
> I noted elsewhere that what should have been an unrelated book
> reminded me how much of the Federal control was put into place in a
> era very much like our own. Anti-trust laws, food content regulation,
> associated laws and associated Federal agencies stem from those times.
>
> Perhaps this is the first glimmer of what further Federal controls and
> even agencies will be added /this/ time around.
>
> 1%-ers, it seems, never learn.

Please tell me of any country that put price controls on food that
survived that act as a democracy or a republic.

BTW, the number one national seller of food in the USA is Walmart.
Walmart disrupted the grocery industry severely in the 1990s when they
added groceries to all of their stores. Are you going to accuse Walmart
of price fixing ? Walmart is where the poor go to shop, they know where
the best deal is.

Lynn

[Bobbie Sellers]

On 8/21/24 23:28, Lynn McGuire wrote:
> On 8/21/2024 10:41 AM, Paul S Person wrote:
> ...
>>>> No Paul, you are wrong here. Any common sense interpretation of that
>>>> text
>>>> makes it obvious that Lynn is right and you are wrong.
>>>
>>> Paul is correct.   A ban on price gouging is _not_ the same as
>>> price controls.
>>>
>>> One might even go so far as suggesting that the inability of the
>>> federal government to enforce the anti-trust laws have increased
>>> the frequency of price gouging.  Particularly in the grocery
>>> industry which has overly consolidated over since 1980.
>>
>> I noted elsewhere that what should have been an unrelated book
>> reminded me how much of the Federal control was put into place in a
>> era very much like our own. Anti-trust laws, food content regulation,
>> associated laws and associated Federal agencies stem from those times.
>>
>> Perhaps this is the first glimmer of what further Federal controls and
>> even agencies will be added /this/ time around.
>>
>> 1%-ers, it seems, never learn.
>
> Please tell me of any country that put price controls on food that
> survived that act as a democracy or a republic.
>
> BTW, the number one national seller of food in the USA is Walmart.
> Walmart disrupted the grocery industry severely in the 1990s when they
> added groceries to all of their stores.  Are you going to accuse Walmart
> of price fixing ?  Walmart is where the poor go to shop, they know where
> the best deal is.
>
> Lynn
>
Read up on WW II measures in the USA where we had both
Price Controls and Food rationing to make more for the troops
on land and at sea. We seem to be a nearly functional
representative popular Democrary and Republic at the same time.
As for hard times coming it seems to me that we always
have hard times for the lower economic classes. A feature not
a bug in Unregulated Capitalism.
"oh the rich get richer and the poor get poorer, in the meantime,
in between timss, ain't we got fun?" Lyric from the 1930s.

bliss

--
b l i s s - S F 4 e v e r at D S L E x t r e m e dot com

[D]

On Thu, 22 Aug 2024, Lynn McGuire wrote:

> On 8/21/2024 10:41 AM, Paul S Person wrote:
> ...
>>>> No Paul, you are wrong here. Any common sense interpretation of that text
>>>> makes it obvious that Lynn is right and you are wrong.
>>>
>>> Paul is correct. A ban on price gouging is _not_ the same as
>>> price controls.
>>>
>>> One might even go so far as suggesting that the inability of the
>>> federal government to enforce the anti-trust laws have increased
>>> the frequency of price gouging. Particularly in the grocery
>>> industry which has overly consolidated over since 1980.
>>
>> I noted elsewhere that what should have been an unrelated book
>> reminded me how much of the Federal control was put into place in a
>> era very much like our own. Anti-trust laws, food content regulation,
>> associated laws and associated Federal agencies stem from those times.
>>
>> Perhaps this is the first glimmer of what further Federal controls and
>> even agencies will be added /this/ time around.
>>
>> 1%-ers, it seems, never learn.
>
> Please tell me of any country that put price controls on food that survived
> that act as a democracy or a republic.
>
> BTW, the number one national seller of food in the USA is Walmart. Walmart
> disrupted the grocery industry severely in the 1990s when they added
> groceries to all of their stores. Are you going to accuse Walmart of price
> fixing ? Walmart is where the poor go to shop, they know where the best deal
> is.
>
> Lynn
>

At the risk of widening the discussion a bit, I recommend Johan Norbergs,
"The Capitalist Manifesto" where he shows in a very easy to understand
way, with plenty of references for his data, how capitalism has made us,
as a species, richer than ever at this present moment, compared with any
other historical era, and how too much government control destroys that
trend in the countries that try the socialist experiment.

For some here, I think it would be a very good and eye opening read. I
also think it is easy to think that government is a solution, when you
have lived all your life in the US and never experienced yourself, full
force, how bad things become when the government tries to "fix" things.

All people I meet in eastern europe are pretty much united in their
disgust of socialism, since they experienced it during the soviet era and
no one wants that back. The only ones who want it back are old people who
used to work for the party, who were at the top, but those people are far
and few in between.

[Scott Lurndal]

D <***@example.net> writes:
>

>At the risk of widening the discussion a bit, I recommend Johan Norbergs,
>"The Capitalist Manifesto" where he shows in a very easy to understand

Balance that with Thomas Piketty.

"Capital in the Twenty-First Century"

[Bobbie Sellers]

On 8/22/24 07:24, Scott Lurndal wrote:
> D <***@example.net> writes:
>>
>
>> At the risk of widening the discussion a bit, I recommend Johan Norbergs,
>> "The Capitalist Manifesto" where he shows in a very easy to understand
>
> Balance that with Thomas Piketty.
>
> "Capital in the Twenty-First Century"
>
I believe he has a subsequent volume as well. But he discusses
the economic conditions as between public wealth and privately held
wealth. Capitalism is responsible for the ongoing climate crisis.
The deleterious effects of mass fossil fuel use were set out quite
early in the development of the Industrial Age and in 1937 a scientist
working for a petroleum extractor made it perfectly clear that disaster
was waiting around the corner but the Profit seekers at the top
suppressed his report in order to sell more gasoline and fuel oils.

bliss

--
b l i s s - S F 4 e v e r at D S L E x t r e m e dot com

[Paul S Person]

On Thu, 22 Aug 2024 07:50:19 -0700, Bobbie Sellers
<***@mouse-potato.com> wrote:

>On 8/22/24 07:24, Scott Lurndal wrote:
>> D <***@example.net> writes:
>>>
>>
>>> At the risk of widening the discussion a bit, I recommend Johan Norbergs,
>>> "The Capitalist Manifesto" where he shows in a very easy to understand
>>
>> Balance that with Thomas Piketty.
>>
>> "Capital in the Twenty-First Century"
>>
> I believe he has a subsequent volume as well. But he discusses
>the economic conditions as between public wealth and privately held
>wealth. Capitalism is responsible for the ongoing climate crisis.
>The deleterious effects of mass fossil fuel use were set out quite
>early in the development of the Industrial Age and in 1937 a scientist
>working for a petroleum extractor made it perfectly clear that disaster
>was waiting around the corner but the Profit seekers at the top
>suppressed his report in order to sell more gasoline and fuel oils.

Externalization of costs is a well-known downside to capitlism.

The poster child for this is the smokestack, belching out stuff that
settles and turns everything black. Even the formerly-white moths.

The latest example is nuclear waste, which was /deliberately/
externalized by the gumming to make the cost of electricity produced
by nuclear plants as competitive as possible with other sources. Now
storing the waste is (and has been for some time) a problem for The
Rest of Us.
--
"Here lies the Tuscan poet Aretino,
Who evil spoke of everyone but God,
Giving as his excuse, 'I never knew him.'"

[D]

On Thu, 22 Aug 2024, Paul S Person wrote:

> On Thu, 22 Aug 2024 07:50:19 -0700, Bobbie Sellers
> <***@mouse-potato.com> wrote:
>
>> On 8/22/24 07:24, Scott Lurndal wrote:
>>> D <***@example.net> writes:
>>>>
>>>
>>>> At the risk of widening the discussion a bit, I recommend Johan Norbergs,
>>>> "The Capitalist Manifesto" where he shows in a very easy to understand
>>>
>>> Balance that with Thomas Piketty.
>>>
>>> "Capital in the Twenty-First Century"
>>>
>> I believe he has a subsequent volume as well. But he discusses
>> the economic conditions as between public wealth and privately held
>> wealth. Capitalism is responsible for the ongoing climate crisis.
>> The deleterious effects of mass fossil fuel use were set out quite
>> early in the development of the Industrial Age and in 1937 a scientist
>> working for a petroleum extractor made it perfectly clear that disaster
>> was waiting around the corner but the Profit seekers at the top
>> suppressed his report in order to sell more gasoline and fuel oils.
>
> Externalization of costs is a well-known downside to capitlism.

Actually externalization of costs is not unique to capitalism, but
government does it just as good if not more than capitalism.

In capitalism, if you use the power of the market, you can actually
reverse by internalizing cost as well.

> The poster child for this is the smokestack, belching out stuff that
> settles and turns everything black. Even the formerly-white moths.

In what government-free country has this happened more, than in countries
with government and regulated markets?

Was the soviet union free of environmental damage due to not having
capitalism?

Actually no... the soviet union was massively polluting its land, and that
pollution has been reversed the more russia has turned to capitalism.

> The latest example is nuclear waste, which was /deliberately/
> externalized by the gumming to make the cost of electricity produced
> by nuclear plants as competitive as possible with other sources. Now
> storing the waste is (and has been for some time) a problem for The
> Rest of Us.

See above.

[D]

On Thu, 22 Aug 2024, Scott Lurndal wrote:

> D <***@example.net> writes:
>>
>
>> At the risk of widening the discussion a bit, I recommend Johan Norbergs,
>> "The Capitalist Manifesto" where he shows in a very easy to understand
>
> Balance that with Thomas Piketty.
>
> "Capital in the Twenty-First Century"
>

Haha, nice joke! ;) That book has been thoroughly critiqued to death I'm
afraid.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_in_the_Twenty-First_Century#Criticism
.

[Bobbie Sellers]

On 8/22/24 12:05, D wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, 22 Aug 2024, Scott Lurndal wrote:
>
>> D <***@example.net> writes:
>>>
>>
>>> At the risk of widening the discussion a bit, I recommend Johan
>>> Norbergs,
>>> "The Capitalist Manifesto" where he shows in a very easy to understand
>>
>> Balance that with Thomas Piketty.
>>
>> "Capital in the Twenty-First Century"
>>
>
> Haha, nice joke! ;) That book has been thoroughly critiqued to death I'm
> afraid.
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_in_the_Twenty-First_Century#Criticism .

It is a very difficult book to read especially for people who
want to make a living in the Capitalist marketplace. It ain't even a
novel with a coherent plot or bio where interesting things are
happening and I bet the only thing harder than reading it was
writing it and dragging lots of facts from very dusty tomes.

Still it clearly points out that the more money accumulates in
private hands the less the benefits to the nation/state/populations.
Especially when the very rich avoid paying for the wars that they
force the nation into for the hope of profit despite the death toll
of soldiers, auxiliaries and non-combatants.

During the Covid-19 shutdowns all over the USA and in the rest
of the world billionaires continued to accumulation wealth. The rest of
the citizenry was losing money and dying. Nurses and physicians and
the maintenance personnel at hospitals were being worked too hard and
many left their occupations as soon as they could do so. This was
because #45 junked the carefully crafted plans from the previous
administration which might have ameliorated the situation.

bliss

--
b l i s s - S F 4 e v e r at D S L E x t r e m e dot com

[Scott Lurndal]

Lynn McGuire <***@gmail.com> writes:
>On 8/21/2024 10:41 AM, Paul S Person wrote:
>...
>>>> No Paul, you are wrong here. Any common sense interpretation of that text
>>>> makes it obvious that Lynn is right and you are wrong.
>>>
>>> Paul is correct. A ban on price gouging is _not_ the same as
>>> price controls.
>>>
>>> One might even go so far as suggesting that the inability of the
>>> federal government to enforce the anti-trust laws have increased
>>> the frequency of price gouging. Particularly in the grocery
>>> industry which has overly consolidated over since 1980.
>>
>> I noted elsewhere that what should have been an unrelated book
>> reminded me how much of the Federal control was put into place in a
>> era very much like our own. Anti-trust laws, food content regulation,
>> associated laws and associated Federal agencies stem from those times.
>>
>> Perhaps this is the first glimmer of what further Federal controls and
>> even agencies will be added /this/ time around.
>>
>> 1%-ers, it seems, never learn.
>
>Please tell me of any country that put price controls on food that
>survived that act as a democracy or a republic.

Nobody has proposed price controls in this thread other than you.

[Paul S Person]

On Thu, 22 Aug 2024 01:28:11 -0500, Lynn McGuire
<***@gmail.com> wrote:

>On 8/21/2024 10:41 AM, Paul S Person wrote:
>...
>>>> No Paul, you are wrong here. Any common sense interpretation of that text
>>>> makes it obvious that Lynn is right and you are wrong.
>>>
>>> Paul is correct. A ban on price gouging is _not_ the same as
>>> price controls.
>>>
>>> One might even go so far as suggesting that the inability of the
>>> federal government to enforce the anti-trust laws have increased
>>> the frequency of price gouging. Particularly in the grocery
>>> industry which has overly consolidated over since 1980.
>>
>> I noted elsewhere that what should have been an unrelated book
>> reminded me how much of the Federal control was put into place in a
>> era very much like our own. Anti-trust laws, food content regulation,
>> associated laws and associated Federal agencies stem from those times.
>>
>> Perhaps this is the first glimmer of what further Federal controls and
>> even agencies will be added /this/ time around.
>>
>> 1%-ers, it seems, never learn.
>
>Please tell me of any country that put price controls on food that
>survived that act as a democracy or a republic.

The USA survived WWII just fine. So did Britain. And others (Canada,
Australia, New Zealand) very likely did as well if they imposed price
controls in the war.

But, as I noted above or elsewhere, the price controls/rationing were
a temporary wartime measure that actually /ended/. And that "hoarders"
were attacked by propaganda and, for all I know, prosecuted if found.
Being temporary and serving a national purpose probably made them more
endurable.

>BTW, the number one national seller of food in the USA is Walmart.
>Walmart disrupted the grocery industry severely in the 1990s when they
>added groceries to all of their stores. Are you going to accuse Walmart
>of price fixing ? Walmart is where the poor go to shop, they know where
>the best deal is.

Or where they can walk to.
--
"Here lies the Tuscan poet Aretino,
Who evil spoke of everyone but God,
Giving as his excuse, 'I never knew him.'"

[Scott Dorsey]

Lynn McGuire <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>Please tell me of any country that put price controls on food that
>survived that act as a democracy or a republic.

The US and the UK? Both did it during wartime as a temporary move and
then eliminated the controls when the crisis was over.

>BTW, the number one national seller of food in the USA is Walmart.
>Walmart disrupted the grocery industry severely in the 1990s when they
>added groceries to all of their stores. Are you going to accuse Walmart
>of price fixing ? Walmart is where the poor go to shop, they know where
>the best deal is.

Walmart is the KING of price fixing. They know exactly what they can get
away with selling a thing for and exactly what they can get the manufacturer
to sell it for, and they have a monopoly in many areas so there is really no
competition.

They will come into a small town with extremely low prices, put all the
other stores in the area out of business, and then raise prices afterward.
It's interesting to compare Walmart prices from place to place.

They do specialize in special "Walmart Models" of appliances in order to
make price comparisons difficult, but on the good side they don't often
have the "slightly smaller than the other guys" packages that the dollar
stores do.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[James Nicoll]

In article <va7pi6$h2o$***@panix3.panix.com>,
Scott Dorsey <***@panix.com> wrote:
>Lynn McGuire <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>Please tell me of any country that put price controls on food that
>>survived that act as a democracy or a republic.
>
>The US and the UK? Both did it during wartime as a temporary move and
>then eliminated the controls when the crisis was over.

Do price supports count as price control?
--
My reviews can be found at http://jamesdavisnicoll.com/
My tor pieces at https://www.tor.com/author/james-davis-nicoll/
My Dreamwidth at https://james-davis-nicoll.dreamwidth.org/
My patreon is at https://www.patreon.com/jamesdnicoll

[Chris Buckley]

On 2024-08-18, Paul S Person <***@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
> On Sat, 17 Aug 2024 13:42:46 -0500, Lynn McGuire
>>
>>Incredibly sad. And the Democrat candidate here in the USA is talking
>>freezing food prices and making grocery stores report any changes in
>>their prices, causing huge paperwork and never ending bureaucracies.
>
> The presumed Democratic candidate for President (she won't be the
> candidate until the convention chooses her) appears to be talking
> about artificially raising prices and keeping them raised far longer
> than the economic situation requires. And I don't want to see a quote
> from 5 years ago on the topic; people's ideas change over time.
>
> I suspect you have happened on a Putin/Trump Talking Point and have
> swallowed it whole. Surely by now you realize that these things are
> useful only as projections onto the Dems of what Trump (and so the
> Republicans, as long as they do not disavow him and all his works and
> all his ways) would like to do. Which is fine in itself -- it's always
> helpful to know what the other guys are planning.

How about a quote from 4 days ago?
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2024/08/15/kamala-harris-price-gouging-groceries/
In a news release Wednesday, her campaign said the first 100 days
of her presidency would include the “first-ever federal ban on
price gouging on food and groceries — setting clear rules of the
road to make clear that big corporations can’t unfairly exploit
consumers to run up excessive corporate profits on food and
groceries.”

We know so little about Harris's policies; this is not a good first policy!

Chris

[Scott Dorsey]

Chris Buckley <***@sabir.com> wrote:
>How about a quote from 4 days ago?
>https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2024/08/15/kamala-harris-price-gouging-groceries/
> In a news release Wednesday, her campaign said the first 100 days
> of her presidency would include the “first-ever federal ban on
> price gouging on food and groceries — setting clear rules of the
> road to make clear that big corporations can’t unfairly exploit
> consumers to run up excessive corporate profits on food and
> groceries.”
>
>We know so little about Harris's policies; this is not a good first policy!

There is very clear price gouging on retail food in poor neighborhoods, and
it's a direct consequence of not having any competition in the market. Go
into a dollar store and check what things actually cost relative to the
grocery store in a rich neighborhood. A price ban won't fix this problem,
although there might be another government-lead solution possible.

BUT.... honestly food in the US is incredibly cheap. Far cheaper than it
was back in the sixties, and much cheaper than it is in Europe. We grow
(dented) corn so cheaply that Mexico wants to put up protective tariffs,
and when you can do something more cheaply than Mexico that's impressive.
Admittedly overall food quality here is poor, but I don't see bringing
food prices in America down as a useful activity. Now, if you bring
down housing costs or medical bills, THAT might be useful.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Chris Buckley]

On 2024-08-18, Scott Dorsey <***@panix.com> wrote:
> Chris Buckley <***@sabir.com> wrote:
>>How about a quote from 4 days ago?
>>https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2024/08/15/kamala-harris-price-gouging-groceries/
>> In a news release Wednesday, her campaign said the first 100 days
>> of her presidency would include the “first-ever federal ban on
>> price gouging on food and groceries — setting clear rules of the
>> road to make clear that big corporations can’t unfairly exploit
>> consumers to run up excessive corporate profits on food and
>> groceries.”
>>
>>We know so little about Harris's policies; this is not a good first policy!
>
> There is very clear price gouging on retail food in poor neighborhoods, and
> it's a direct consequence of not having any competition in the market. Go
> into a dollar store and check what things actually cost relative to the
> grocery store in a rich neighborhood. A price ban won't fix this problem,
> although there might be another government-lead solution possible.
>
> BUT.... honestly food in the US is incredibly cheap. Far cheaper than it
> was back in the sixties, and much cheaper than it is in Europe. We grow
> (dented) corn so cheaply that Mexico wants to put up protective tariffs,
> and when you can do something more cheaply than Mexico that's impressive.
> Admittedly overall food quality here is poor, but I don't see bringing
> food prices in America down as a useful activity. Now, if you bring
> down housing costs or medical bills, THAT might be useful.
> --scott

Yes, retail food prices in poor neighborhoods are much higher than in
rich suburbs. But it's clearly not price gouging, but the cost of
doing business in an urban, poor area. If it was only lack of competition,
you'd have supermarket chains fighting each other to open stores in
those areas. But instead you have cities desperately trying to keep
the supermarkets they have open, and offering deals to get supermarkets
to consider opening a new one. The existing supermarkets aren't making
enough money.

A few years back, I watched DC trying to woo Walmart to open a large
store (including supermarket) in an under-served area. It took many
years of negotiations, rule-changing, and property tax breaks to
finally get an agreement. It wasn't easy. It never opened - the next
city council came in and passed a law saying any extremely large
retail company (basically just Walmart) must pay a minimum wage of $5/hour
over the current minimum wage. Walmart said they had no chance of
making money, broke their leases, and left.

The extra cost of urban business is not only the obvious costs of land
cost, security/shoplifting, and property tax, but things like just
getting the food from warehouses to the store! As you say, the
overall American cost of food is actually low now, partly because the
industry has solved the supply chain to the store issues, at least for
large suburban stores. My supermarket can handle at least a dozen delivery
trucks at once, perhaps half of them 18-wheelers. You can't do that kind of
traffic in an urban environment serving pedestrian customers.

I don't know how to reduce the cost of urban supermarkets other than
directly giving subsidies. But any attempts to legislate the price of
groceries in those urban markets is going to make things worse.

Chris

[Dimensional Traveler]

On 8/18/2024 6:11 PM, Chris Buckley wrote:
> On 2024-08-18, Scott Dorsey <***@panix.com> wrote:
>> Chris Buckley <***@sabir.com> wrote:
>>> How about a quote from 4 days ago?
>>> https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2024/08/15/kamala-harris-price-gouging-groceries/
>>> In a news release Wednesday, her campaign said the first 100 days
>>> of her presidency would include the “first-ever federal ban on
>>> price gouging on food and groceries — setting clear rules of the
>>> road to make clear that big corporations can’t unfairly exploit
>>> consumers to run up excessive corporate profits on food and
>>> groceries.”
>>>
>>> We know so little about Harris's policies; this is not a good first policy!
>>
>> There is very clear price gouging on retail food in poor neighborhoods, and
>> it's a direct consequence of not having any competition in the market. Go
>> into a dollar store and check what things actually cost relative to the
>> grocery store in a rich neighborhood. A price ban won't fix this problem,
>> although there might be another government-lead solution possible.
>>
>> BUT.... honestly food in the US is incredibly cheap. Far cheaper than it
>> was back in the sixties, and much cheaper than it is in Europe. We grow
>> (dented) corn so cheaply that Mexico wants to put up protective tariffs,
>> and when you can do something more cheaply than Mexico that's impressive.
>> Admittedly overall food quality here is poor, but I don't see bringing
>> food prices in America down as a useful activity. Now, if you bring
>> down housing costs or medical bills, THAT might be useful.
>> --scott
>
> Yes, retail food prices in poor neighborhoods are much higher than in
> rich suburbs. But it's clearly not price gouging, but the cost of
> doing business in an urban, poor area. If it was only lack of competition,
> you'd have supermarket chains fighting each other to open stores in
> those areas. But instead you have cities desperately trying to keep
> the supermarkets they have open, and offering deals to get supermarkets
> to consider opening a new one. The existing supermarkets aren't making
> enough money.
>
> A few years back, I watched DC trying to woo Walmart to open a large
> store (including supermarket) in an under-served area. It took many
> years of negotiations, rule-changing, and property tax breaks to
> finally get an agreement. It wasn't easy. It never opened - the next
> city council came in and passed a law saying any extremely large
> retail company (basically just Walmart) must pay a minimum wage of $5/hour
> over the current minimum wage. Walmart said they had no chance of
> making money, broke their leases, and left.
>
> The extra cost of urban business is not only the obvious costs of land
> cost, security/shoplifting, and property tax, but things like just
> getting the food from warehouses to the store! As you say, the
> overall American cost of food is actually low now, partly because the
> industry has solved the supply chain to the store issues, at least for
> large suburban stores. My supermarket can handle at least a dozen delivery
> trucks at once, perhaps half of them 18-wheelers. You can't do that kind of
> traffic in an urban environment serving pedestrian customers.
>
> I don't know how to reduce the cost of urban supermarkets other than
> directly giving subsidies. But any attempts to legislate the price of
> groceries in those urban markets is going to make things worse.
>
Just for consideration, I know from personal experience that many crops
in the US are bought from the farmers WAY below cost. The Federal
government pays MASSIVE subsidies to farmers to keep them in business
and it _still_ is barely enough to do that. The price increases between
the farm and the market are much higher than anyone is willing to
believe and the costs along the logistic train have not gone up anywhere
near as much as the profits over the last several years.

--
I've done good in this world. Now I'm tired and just want to be a cranky
dirty old man.

[D]

On Mon, 19 Aug 2024, Chris Buckley wrote:

> On 2024-08-18, Scott Dorsey <***@panix.com> wrote:
>> Chris Buckley <***@sabir.com> wrote:
>>> How about a quote from 4 days ago?
>>> https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2024/08/15/kamala-harris-price-gouging-groceries/
>>> In a news release Wednesday, her campaign said the first 100 days
>>> of her presidency would include the “first-ever federal ban on
>>> price gouging on food and groceries — setting clear rules of the
>>> road to make clear that big corporations can’t unfairly exploit
>>> consumers to run up excessive corporate profits on food and
>>> groceries.”
>>>
>>> We know so little about Harris's policies; this is not a good first policy!
>>
>> There is very clear price gouging on retail food in poor neighborhoods, and
>> it's a direct consequence of not having any competition in the market. Go
>> into a dollar store and check what things actually cost relative to the
>> grocery store in a rich neighborhood. A price ban won't fix this problem,
>> although there might be another government-lead solution possible.
>>
>> BUT.... honestly food in the US is incredibly cheap. Far cheaper than it
>> was back in the sixties, and much cheaper than it is in Europe. We grow
>> (dented) corn so cheaply that Mexico wants to put up protective tariffs,
>> and when you can do something more cheaply than Mexico that's impressive.
>> Admittedly overall food quality here is poor, but I don't see bringing
>> food prices in America down as a useful activity. Now, if you bring
>> down housing costs or medical bills, THAT might be useful.
>> --scott
>
> Yes, retail food prices in poor neighborhoods are much higher than in
> rich suburbs. But it's clearly not price gouging, but the cost of
> doing business in an urban, poor area. If it was only lack of competition,
> you'd have supermarket chains fighting each other to open stores in
> those areas. But instead you have cities desperately trying to keep
> the supermarkets they have open, and offering deals to get supermarkets
> to consider opening a new one. The existing supermarkets aren't making
> enough money.
>
> A few years back, I watched DC trying to woo Walmart to open a large
> store (including supermarket) in an under-served area. It took many
> years of negotiations, rule-changing, and property tax breaks to
> finally get an agreement. It wasn't easy. It never opened - the next
> city council came in and passed a law saying any extremely large
> retail company (basically just Walmart) must pay a minimum wage of $5/hour
> over the current minimum wage. Walmart said they had no chance of
> making money, broke their leases, and left.
>
> The extra cost of urban business is not only the obvious costs of land
> cost, security/shoplifting, and property tax, but things like just
> getting the food from warehouses to the store! As you say, the
> overall American cost of food is actually low now, partly because the
> industry has solved the supply chain to the store issues, at least for
> large suburban stores. My supermarket can handle at least a dozen delivery
> trucks at once, perhaps half of them 18-wheelers. You can't do that kind of
> traffic in an urban environment serving pedestrian customers.
>
> I don't know how to reduce the cost of urban supermarkets other than
> directly giving subsidies. But any attempts to legislate the price of
> groceries in those urban markets is going to make things worse.
>
> Chris
>

Thank you Chris. A very nice example of how government is always fighting
business and trying to kill it in various ways. Especially, and
paradoxically, it seems hell bent on doing this where it affects the
working classes the most. Don't ask me why, but it certainly seems that
way.

[Bobbie Sellers]

On 8/19/24 00:57, D wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, 19 Aug 2024, Chris Buckley wrote:
>
>> On 2024-08-18, Scott Dorsey <***@panix.com> wrote:
>>> Chris Buckley  <***@sabir.com> wrote:
>>>> How about a quote from 4 days ago?
>>>> https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2024/08/15/kamala-harris-price-gouging-groceries/
>>>>    In a news release Wednesday, her campaign said the first 100 days
>>>>    of her presidency would include the “first-ever federal ban on
>>>>    price gouging on food and groceries — setting clear rules of the
>>>>    road to make clear that big corporations can’t unfairly exploit
>>>>    consumers to run up excessive corporate profits on food and
>>>>    groceries.”
>>>>
>>>> We know so little about Harris's policies; this is not a good first
>>>> policy!
>>>
>>> There is very clear price gouging on retail food in poor
>>> neighborhoods, and
>>> it's a direct consequence of not having any competition in the
>>> market.  Go
>>> into a dollar store and check what things actually cost relative to the
>>> grocery store in a rich neighborhood.  A price ban won't fix this
>>> problem,
>>> although there might be another government-lead solution possible.
>>>
>>> BUT.... honestly food in the US is incredibly cheap.  Far cheaper
>>> than it
>>> was back in the sixties, and much cheaper than it is in Europe.  We grow
>>> (dented) corn so cheaply that Mexico wants to put up protective tariffs,
>>> and when you can do something more cheaply than Mexico that's
>>> impressive.
>>> Admittedly overall food quality here is poor, but I don't see bringing
>>> food prices in America down as a useful activity.  Now, if you bring
>>> down housing costs or medical bills, THAT might be useful.
>>> --scott
>>
>> Yes, retail food prices in poor neighborhoods are much higher than in
>> rich suburbs.  But it's clearly not price gouging, but the cost of
>> doing business in an urban, poor area. If it was only lack of
>> competition,
>> you'd have supermarket chains fighting each other to open stores in
>> those areas. But instead you have cities desperately trying to keep
>> the supermarkets they have open, and offering deals to get supermarkets
>> to consider opening a new one. The existing supermarkets aren't making
>> enough money.
>>
>> A few years back, I watched DC trying to woo Walmart to open a large
>> store (including supermarket) in an under-served area. It took many
>> years of negotiations, rule-changing, and property tax breaks to
>> finally get an agreement. It wasn't easy. It never opened - the next
>> city council came in and passed a law saying any extremely large
>> retail company (basically just Walmart) must pay a minimum wage of
>> $5/hour
>> over the current minimum wage. Walmart said they had no chance of
>> making money, broke their leases, and left.
>>
>> The extra cost of urban business is not only the obvious costs of land
>> cost, security/shoplifting, and property tax, but things like just
>> getting the food from warehouses to the store!  As you say, the
>> overall American cost of food is actually low now, partly because the
>> industry has solved the supply chain to the store issues, at least for
>> large suburban stores.  My supermarket can handle at least a dozen
>> delivery
>> trucks at once, perhaps half of them 18-wheelers. You can't do that
>> kind of
>> traffic in an urban environment serving pedestrian customers.
>>
>> I don't know how to reduce the cost of urban supermarkets other than
>> directly giving subsidies. But any attempts to legislate the price of
>> groceries in those urban markets is going to make things worse.
>>
>> Chris
>>
>
> Thank you Chris. A very nice example of how government is always
> fighting business and trying to kill it in various ways. Especially, and
> paradoxically, it seems hell bent on doing this where it affects the
> working classes the most. Don't ask me why, but it certainly seems that way.

Government is not fighting honest and responsible businesses just those
that attempt to poison the consumers with products and with emissions
from their production plants.
Unregulated capitalism has been poisoning use since the Civil War in
the USA.
You are poisoning discourse with foolish lies.

bliss
--
b l i s s - S F 4 e v e r at D S L E x t r e m e dot com

[Paul S Person]

On 18 Aug 2024 20:00:50 GMT, Chris Buckley <***@sabir.com> wrote:

>On 2024-08-18, Paul S Person <***@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
>> On Sat, 17 Aug 2024 13:42:46 -0500, Lynn McGuire
>>>
>>>Incredibly sad. And the Democrat candidate here in the USA is talking
>>>freezing food prices and making grocery stores report any changes in
>>>their prices, causing huge paperwork and never ending bureaucracies.
>>
>> The presumed Democratic candidate for President (she won't be the
>> candidate until the convention chooses her) appears to be talking
>> about artificially raising prices and keeping them raised far longer
>> than the economic situation requires. And I don't want to see a quote
>> from 5 years ago on the topic; people's ideas change over time.
>>
>> I suspect you have happened on a Putin/Trump Talking Point and have
>> swallowed it whole. Surely by now you realize that these things are
>> useful only as projections onto the Dems of what Trump (and so the
>> Republicans, as long as they do not disavow him and all his works and
>> all his ways) would like to do. Which is fine in itself -- it's always
>> helpful to know what the other guys are planning.
>
>How about a quote from 4 days ago?
>https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2024/08/15/kamala-harris-price-gouging-groceries/
> In a news release Wednesday, her campaign said the first 100 days
> of her presidency would include the “first-ever federal ban on
> price gouging on food and groceries — setting clear rules of the
> road to make clear that big corporations can’t unfairly exploit
> consumers to run up excessive corporate profits on food and
> groceries.”
>
>We know so little about Harris's policies; this is not a good first policy!

The claim was that she proposed "freezing food prices and making
grocery stores report any changes in their prices".

Your quote simply doesn't back that up in any way.

But keep on trying. Who can say what Kamala may have said, say, 15
years ago in a private conversation now being outed by someone from
memory with no backup at all. Or some source of similar likely
validity.

This is actually an /excellent/ first policy -- going directly at the
malefactors. However, I would suggest she have someone actually
/study/ the situation to see if the problem she is trying to solve
actually exists -- that is, that the higher grocery prices actually
/are/ price-gouging and not legitimate economic behavior.

There is no point in solving a problem that does not exist.

Note: I buy a lot of store brands, and some of those, at least, have
dropped back down, at least a bit. Those concerned about grocery store
reporting should keep two things in mind:
1) If the stores always mark up the items they sell by the same
amount, then /they/ aren't gouging.
2) If restricted to larger stores, or chains, then the report would
probably be done by a computer anyway. We need not picture 100 new
employees just to keep track of prices.
--
"Here lies the Tuscan poet Aretino,
Who evil spoke of everyone but God,
Giving as his excuse, 'I never knew him.'"

[Chris Buckley]

On 2024-08-19, Paul S Person <***@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
> On 18 Aug 2024 20:00:50 GMT, Chris Buckley <***@sabir.com> wrote:
>
>>On 2024-08-18, Paul S Person <***@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
>>> On Sat, 17 Aug 2024 13:42:46 -0500, Lynn McGuire
>>>>
>>>>Incredibly sad. And the Democrat candidate here in the USA is talking
>>>>freezing food prices and making grocery stores report any changes in
>>>>their prices, causing huge paperwork and never ending bureaucracies.
>>>
>>> The presumed Democratic candidate for President (she won't be the
>>> candidate until the convention chooses her) appears to be talking
>>> about artificially raising prices and keeping them raised far longer
>>> than the economic situation requires. And I don't want to see a quote
>>> from 5 years ago on the topic; people's ideas change over time.
>>>
>>> I suspect you have happened on a Putin/Trump Talking Point and have
>>> swallowed it whole. Surely by now you realize that these things are
>>> useful only as projections onto the Dems of what Trump (and so the
>>> Republicans, as long as they do not disavow him and all his works and
>>> all his ways) would like to do. Which is fine in itself -- it's always
>>> helpful to know what the other guys are planning.
>>
>>How about a quote from 4 days ago?
>>https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2024/08/15/kamala-harris-price-gouging-groceries/
>> In a news release Wednesday, her campaign said the first 100 days
>> of her presidency would include the “first-ever federal ban on
>> price gouging on food and groceries — setting clear rules of the
>> road to make clear that big corporations can’t unfairly exploit
>> consumers to run up excessive corporate profits on food and
>> groceries.”
>>
>>We know so little about Harris's policies; this is not a good first policy!
>
> The claim was that she proposed "freezing food prices and making
> grocery stores report any changes in their prices".
>
> Your quote simply doesn't back that up in any way.
>
> But keep on trying. Who can say what Kamala may have said, say, 15
> years ago in a private conversation now being outed by someone from
> memory with no backup at all. Or some source of similar likely
> validity.

Yes, freezing prices is a slight exageration of putting price controls
on, but only slight. The mechanisms for enforcing them are the same: how
do you envision them as different?


> This is actually an /excellent/ first policy -- going directly at the
> malefactors.

What malefactors???

However, I would suggest she have someone actually
> /study/ the situation to see if the problem she is trying to solve
> actually exists -- that is, that the higher grocery prices actually
> /are/ price-gouging and not legitimate economic behavior.
>
> There is no point in solving a problem that does not exist.

I agree with all of this. I would have no objection (other than a
mild waste of time and money) if she had proposed an urgent study of grocery
prices and whether "price gouging" is happening. But she didn't.

She said that the problem exists and that it is very urgent for the
federal government to have rules and regulations right now to stop them.
That it is so clear cut that she will have rules in place within 100 days.

Why do *you* believe that it is an excellent policy to have the
federal government involved in regulating grocery prices?

> Note: I buy a lot of store brands, and some of those, at least, have
> dropped back down, at least a bit. Those concerned about grocery store
> reporting should keep two things in mind:
> 1) If the stores always mark up the items they sell by the same
> amount, then /they/ aren't gouging.
> 2) If restricted to larger stores, or chains, then the report would
> probably be done by a computer anyway. We need not picture 100 new
> employees just to keep track of prices.

It's done by a computer, it's simple? Tell that the federal government -
how many multi-billion dollar computer programs have they abandoned over
the years?

My supermarket has very low prices on basics ($2.49/gallon for milk),
but has a large selection of luxury and prepared items with a much
higher markup (I'm sure some of the sushi items are 200% or more). Are you
saying the federal government should have a say in this strategy?

Their fruit prices normally vary by as much as a factor of 3 or more
throughout the year - it matters if they are getting them from local
orchards or Brazil. Are you saying the markup has to be the same
throughout the year?

Just what is this magical computer keeping track of at the federal level?

Chris

[Dimensional Traveler]

On 8/20/2024 8:05 AM, Chris Buckley wrote:
> On 2024-08-19, Paul S Person <***@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
>> On 18 Aug 2024 20:00:50 GMT, Chris Buckley <***@sabir.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 2024-08-18, Paul S Person <***@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
>>>> On Sat, 17 Aug 2024 13:42:46 -0500, Lynn McGuire
>>>>>
>>>>> Incredibly sad. And the Democrat candidate here in the USA is talking
>>>>> freezing food prices and making grocery stores report any changes in
>>>>> their prices, causing huge paperwork and never ending bureaucracies.
>>>>
>>>> The presumed Democratic candidate for President (she won't be the
>>>> candidate until the convention chooses her) appears to be talking
>>>> about artificially raising prices and keeping them raised far longer
>>>> than the economic situation requires. And I don't want to see a quote
>>>> from 5 years ago on the topic; people's ideas change over time.
>>>>
>>>> I suspect you have happened on a Putin/Trump Talking Point and have
>>>> swallowed it whole. Surely by now you realize that these things are
>>>> useful only as projections onto the Dems of what Trump (and so the
>>>> Republicans, as long as they do not disavow him and all his works and
>>>> all his ways) would like to do. Which is fine in itself -- it's always
>>>> helpful to know what the other guys are planning.
>>>
>>> How about a quote from 4 days ago?
>>> https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2024/08/15/kamala-harris-price-gouging-groceries/
>>> In a news release Wednesday, her campaign said the first 100 days
>>> of her presidency would include the “first-ever federal ban on
>>> price gouging on food and groceries — setting clear rules of the
>>> road to make clear that big corporations can’t unfairly exploit
>>> consumers to run up excessive corporate profits on food and
>>> groceries.”
>>>
>>> We know so little about Harris's policies; this is not a good first policy!
>>
>> The claim was that she proposed "freezing food prices and making
>> grocery stores report any changes in their prices".
>>
>> Your quote simply doesn't back that up in any way.
>>
>> But keep on trying. Who can say what Kamala may have said, say, 15
>> years ago in a private conversation now being outed by someone from
>> memory with no backup at all. Or some source of similar likely
>> validity.
>
> Yes, freezing prices is a slight exageration of putting price controls
> on, but only slight. The mechanisms for enforcing them are the same: how
> do you envision them as different?
>
>
>> This is actually an /excellent/ first policy -- going directly at the
>> malefactors.
>
> What malefactors???
>
> However, I would suggest she have someone actually
>> /study/ the situation to see if the problem she is trying to solve
>> actually exists -- that is, that the higher grocery prices actually
>> /are/ price-gouging and not legitimate economic behavior.
>>
>> There is no point in solving a problem that does not exist.
>
> I agree with all of this. I would have no objection (other than a
> mild waste of time and money) if she had proposed an urgent study of grocery
> prices and whether "price gouging" is happening. But she didn't.
>
Numerous studies have already been done that show price gouging has been
going on ever since the beginning of the COVID pandemic.

--
I've done good in this world. Now I'm tired and just want to be a cranky
dirty old man.

[Chris Buckley]

On 2024-08-21, Dimensional Traveler <***@sonic.net> wrote:
> On 8/20/2024 8:05 AM, Chris Buckley wrote:
>> On 2024-08-19, Paul S Person <***@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
>>> On 18 Aug 2024 20:00:50 GMT, Chris Buckley <***@sabir.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 2024-08-18, Paul S Person <***@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
>>>>> On Sat, 17 Aug 2024 13:42:46 -0500, Lynn McGuire
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Incredibly sad. And the Democrat candidate here in the USA is talking
>>>>>> freezing food prices and making grocery stores report any changes in
>>>>>> their prices, causing huge paperwork and never ending bureaucracies.
>>>>>
>>>>> The presumed Democratic candidate for President (she won't be the
>>>>> candidate until the convention chooses her) appears to be talking
>>>>> about artificially raising prices and keeping them raised far longer
>>>>> than the economic situation requires. And I don't want to see a quote
>>>>> from 5 years ago on the topic; people's ideas change over time.
>>>>>
>>>>> I suspect you have happened on a Putin/Trump Talking Point and have
>>>>> swallowed it whole. Surely by now you realize that these things are
>>>>> useful only as projections onto the Dems of what Trump (and so the
>>>>> Republicans, as long as they do not disavow him and all his works and
>>>>> all his ways) would like to do. Which is fine in itself -- it's always
>>>>> helpful to know what the other guys are planning.
>>>>
>>>> How about a quote from 4 days ago?
>>>> https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2024/08/15/kamala-harris-price-gouging-groceries/
>>>> In a news release Wednesday, her campaign said the first 100 days
>>>> of her presidency would include the “first-ever federal ban on
>>>> price gouging on food and groceries — setting clear rules of the
>>>> road to make clear that big corporations can’t unfairly exploit
>>>> consumers to run up excessive corporate profits on food and
>>>> groceries.”
>>>>
>>>> We know so little about Harris's policies; this is not a good first policy!
>>>
>>> The claim was that she proposed "freezing food prices and making
>>> grocery stores report any changes in their prices".
>>>
>>> Your quote simply doesn't back that up in any way.
>>>
>>> But keep on trying. Who can say what Kamala may have said, say, 15
>>> years ago in a private conversation now being outed by someone from
>>> memory with no backup at all. Or some source of similar likely
>>> validity.
>>
>> Yes, freezing prices is a slight exageration of putting price controls
>> on, but only slight. The mechanisms for enforcing them are the same: how
>> do you envision them as different?
>>
>>
>>> This is actually an /excellent/ first policy -- going directly at the
>>> malefactors.
>>
>> What malefactors???
>>
>> However, I would suggest she have someone actually
>>> /study/ the situation to see if the problem she is trying to solve
>>> actually exists -- that is, that the higher grocery prices actually
>>> /are/ price-gouging and not legitimate economic behavior.
>>>
>>> There is no point in solving a problem that does not exist.
>>
>> I agree with all of this. I would have no objection (other than a
>> mild waste of time and money) if she had proposed an urgent study of grocery
>> prices and whether "price gouging" is happening. But she didn't.
>>
> Numerous studies have already been done that show price gouging has been
> going on ever since the beginning of the COVID pandemic.

Please give citations to the studies that prove price gouging has been
done in supermarkets or that it is responsible for inflation of
grocery prices. Lots of accusations, lots of fuzzy thinking and waving
of hands, but nothing that is at all conclusive or even somewhat
convincing. Profits went up very slightly, but that's what happens you
give people hundreds of billions of dollars, directly and indirectly;
they buy more groceries!

Chris

[Scott Dorsey]

Chris Buckley <***@sabir.com> wrote:
>Please give citations to the studies that prove price gouging has been
>done in supermarkets or that it is responsible for inflation of
>grocery prices. Lots of accusations, lots of fuzzy thinking and waving
>of hands, but nothing that is at all conclusive or even somewhat
>convincing. Profits went up very slightly, but that's what happens you
>give people hundreds of billions of dollars, directly and indirectly;
>they buy more groceries!

I don't think the price gouging is happening in supermarkets so much as
in food providers that cater to lower income people in areas without
supermarkets. (Which is another example here of how competition is a
good thing for markets.)
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[D]

On Wed, 21 Aug 2024, Scott Dorsey wrote:

> Chris Buckley <***@sabir.com> wrote:
>> Please give citations to the studies that prove price gouging has been
>> done in supermarkets or that it is responsible for inflation of
>> grocery prices. Lots of accusations, lots of fuzzy thinking and waving
>> of hands, but nothing that is at all conclusive or even somewhat
>> convincing. Profits went up very slightly, but that's what happens you
>> give people hundreds of billions of dollars, directly and indirectly;
>> they buy more groceries!
>
> I don't think the price gouging is happening in supermarkets so much as
> in food providers that cater to lower income people in areas without
> supermarkets. (Which is another example here of how competition is a
> good thing for markets.)
> --scott
>

In sweden there has been a debate about high food prices, and the
government analysed the issue and came to the conclusion that price
increases was not due to producers, and was not due to supermarkets, but,
due to the distributors.

Sweden is a small market, so there are only 3 major super markets, and all
three own their own distributors and only 1 out of the 3 sells to
independent stores. The other 2 only sell to their own branded stores.

So what the stores did was to say that "we have _not_ increased any
prices", while not telling the public that they did increase the prices at
the distributor level.

To further add something to this thread, I read in the news the other day
that Norway fined 3 major super market conglomerates 500 million USD
(approximately) for illegal cooperation around prices.

[Chris Buckley]

On 2024-08-21, Scott Dorsey <***@panix.com> wrote:
> Chris Buckley <***@sabir.com> wrote:
>>Please give citations to the studies that prove price gouging has been
>>done in supermarkets or that it is responsible for inflation of
>>grocery prices. Lots of accusations, lots of fuzzy thinking and waving
>>of hands, but nothing that is at all conclusive or even somewhat
>>convincing. Profits went up very slightly, but that's what happens you
>>give people hundreds of billions of dollars, directly and indirectly;
>>they buy more groceries!
>
> I don't think the price gouging is happening in supermarkets so much as
> in food providers that cater to lower income people in areas without
> supermarkets. (Which is another example here of how competition is a
> good thing for markets.)

Again,if there was good money to be made from selling food to poorer
urban folks, the supermarkets would be doing so. Groceries is one of
the most competitive areas out there. I have never heard of an urban
area that deliberately kept supermarkets out to keep prices non-competitive.

I think that you are using a much looser definition of price gouging
(akin to excess profits) than anybody else in this discussion,
including Harris, and I've been trying to argue from your
definition here. As a legal term, price gouging is defined as temporarily
selling something for more than market value due to some external
circumstance like catastrophe. Unfortunately, the price of food in
poor urban areas is at market value for that market.

Chris

[Paul S Person]

On 22 Aug 2024 11:40:31 GMT, Chris Buckley <***@sabir.com> wrote:

>On 2024-08-21, Scott Dorsey <***@panix.com> wrote:
>> Chris Buckley <***@sabir.com> wrote:
>>>Please give citations to the studies that prove price gouging has been
>>>done in supermarkets or that it is responsible for inflation of
>>>grocery prices. Lots of accusations, lots of fuzzy thinking and waving
>>>of hands, but nothing that is at all conclusive or even somewhat
>>>convincing. Profits went up very slightly, but that's what happens you
>>>give people hundreds of billions of dollars, directly and indirectly;
>>>they buy more groceries!
>>
>> I don't think the price gouging is happening in supermarkets so much as
>> in food providers that cater to lower income people in areas without
>> supermarkets. (Which is another example here of how competition is a
>> good thing for markets.)
>
>Again,if there was good money to be made from selling food to poorer
>urban folks, the supermarkets would be doing so. Groceries is one of
>the most competitive areas out there. I have never heard of an urban
>area that deliberately kept supermarkets out to keep prices non-competitive.

I can remember when the problem with such stores was "lack of access
to fresh fruits and vegetables". But times have changed.

>I think that you are using a much looser definition of price gouging
>(akin to excess profits) than anybody else in this discussion,
>including Harris, and I've been trying to argue from your
>definition here. As a legal term, price gouging is defined as temporarily
>selling something for more than market value due to some external
>circumstance like catastrophe. Unfortunately, the price of food in
>poor urban areas is at market value for that market.

That is a good and useful point.
--
"Here lies the Tuscan poet Aretino,
Who evil spoke of everyone but God,
Giving as his excuse, 'I never knew him.'"

[Paul S Person]

On 20 Aug 2024 15:05:59 GMT, Chris Buckley <***@sabir.com> wrote:

>On 2024-08-19, Paul S Person <***@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:

<snip-a-bit>

>> The claim was that she proposed "freezing food prices and making
>> grocery stores report any changes in their prices".
>>
>> Your quote simply doesn't back that up in any way.
>>
>> But keep on trying. Who can say what Kamala may have said, say, 15
>> years ago in a private conversation now being outed by someone from
>> memory with no backup at all. Or some source of similar likely
>> validity.
>
>Yes, freezing prices is a slight exageration of putting price controls
>on, but only slight. The mechanisms for enforcing them are the same: how
>do you envision them as different?

It is a PTTP, pure and simple.

I don't "envision" either as likely any time soon.

Price /controls/ imply rationing. As during WWII. You control the
prices because otherwise scarcity will cause them to rise.

Price /gouging/ is handled by putting people in prison. It is a crime.
Or should be. The problem, of course, is telling when it is happening
-- and who is doing it.

>> This is actually an /excellent/ first policy -- going directly at the
>> malefactors.
>
>What malefactors???

That's my point: the people actually doing the price gouging should be
identified before solutions are proposed.

>>However, I would suggest she have someone actually
>> /study/ the situation to see if the problem she is trying to solve
>> actually exists -- that is, that the higher grocery prices actually
>> /are/ price-gouging and not legitimate economic behavior.
>>
>> There is no point in solving a problem that does not exist.
>
>I agree with all of this. I would have no objection (other than a
>mild waste of time and money) if she had proposed an urgent study of grocery
>prices and whether "price gouging" is happening. But she didn't.
>
>She said that the problem exists and that it is very urgent for the
>federal government to have rules and regulations right now to stop them.
>That it is so clear cut that she will have rules in place within 100 days.

Only if the laws exist already. Some have indicated that new laws
might be needed. That could take a while to sort out. Particularly if
the Republicans control either or both Houses of Congress.

>Why do *you* believe that it is an excellent policy to have the
>federal government involved in regulating grocery prices?

I said it was an excellent /first/ policy. I did not say it was
excellent as such. It is a good place to start. She can make some fine
declarations from the Oval Office on the topic. Whether it actually
goes anywhere who can say? This is politics, after all. Did the Wall
get build with Mexico paying? Don't think so.

>> Note: I buy a lot of store brands, and some of those, at least, have
>> dropped back down, at least a bit. Those concerned about grocery store
>> reporting should keep two things in mind:
>> 1) If the stores always mark up the items they sell by the same
>> amount, then /they/ aren't gouging.
>> 2) If restricted to larger stores, or chains, then the report would
>> probably be done by a computer anyway. We need not picture 100 new
>> employees just to keep track of prices.
>
>It's done by a computer, it's simple? Tell that the federal government -
>how many multi-billion dollar computer programs have they abandoned over
>the years?

Do you really believe that a major corporation is somehow unable to
tell exactly where every penny received from something it sold goes
to? Cost of item, cost of overhead, cost of wages, profit, and any
others? Not the CEO, perhaps, but some weenie three or four levels
down in Accounting surely can.

If they can't, then /they can't tell which lines/products make the
most money for them/ and how can they make intelligent business
decisions if they literally don't know what they are doing?

>My supermarket has very low prices on basics ($2.49/gallon for milk),
>but has a large selection of luxury and prepared items with a much
>higher markup (I'm sure some of the sushi items are 200% or more). Are you
>saying the federal government should have a say in this strategy?
>
>Their fruit prices normally vary by as much as a factor of 3 or more
>throughout the year - it matters if they are getting them from local
>orchards or Brazil. Are you saying the markup has to be the same
>throughout the year?

No. But it has to not triple when a pandemic hits unless there is a
good economic reason for it. And "raking it in while I have the chance
and devil take the hindmost" is not a good economic reason.

Which is why the effort, confined to the major corporations, should
also start with historical research so an idea can be formed of what
is normal and what is not.

>Just what is this magical computer keeping track of at the federal level?

What magical computer? I don't think they exist ... in this reality.

Maybe in PTTP-land. In fact, I would think Russia would be a good
place to look for such a machine. Or China.
--
"Here lies the Tuscan poet Aretino,
Who evil spoke of everyone but God,
Giving as his excuse, 'I never knew him.'"

[Chris Buckley]

On 2024-08-21, Paul S Person <***@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
> On 20 Aug 2024 15:05:59 GMT, Chris Buckley <***@sabir.com> wrote:
>
>>On 2024-08-19, Paul S Person <***@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
>
><snip-a-bit>
>
>>> The claim was that she proposed "freezing food prices and making
>>> grocery stores report any changes in their prices".
>>>
>>> Your quote simply doesn't back that up in any way.
>>>
>>> But keep on trying. Who can say what Kamala may have said, say, 15
>>> years ago in a private conversation now being outed by someone from
>>> memory with no backup at all. Or some source of similar likely
>>> validity.
>>
>>Yes, freezing prices is a slight exageration of putting price controls
>>on, but only slight. The mechanisms for enforcing them are the same: how
>>do you envision them as different?
>
> It is a PTTP, pure and simple.
>
> I don't "envision" either as likely any time soon.
>
> Price /controls/ imply rationing. As during WWII. You control the
> prices because otherwise scarcity will cause them to rise.

You are using your own private definitions again. Price control is
a general economic term that includes things like price gouging laws,
price freezing, rent control, minimum wages. None of these imply
rationing, which is a logistics term. Both rationing and price controls
can be used to solve the same problem, but if anything, it is rationing
that implies price controls.

> Price /gouging/ is handled by putting people in prison. It is a crime.
> Or should be. The problem, of course, is telling when it is happening
> -- and who is doing it.
>
>>> This is actually an /excellent/ first policy -- going directly at the
>>> malefactors.
>>
>>What malefactors???
>
> That's my point: the people actually doing the price gouging should be
> identified before solutions are proposed.
>>>However, I would suggest she have someone actually
>>> /study/ the situation to see if the problem she is trying to solve
>>> actually exists -- that is, that the higher grocery prices actually
>>> /are/ price-gouging and not legitimate economic behavior.
>>>
>>> There is no point in solving a problem that does not exist.
>>
>>I agree with all of this. I would have no objection (other than a
>>mild waste of time and money) if she had proposed an urgent study of grocery
>>prices and whether "price gouging" is happening. But she didn't.
>>
>>She said that the problem exists and that it is very urgent for the
>>federal government to have rules and regulations right now to stop them.
>>That it is so clear cut that she will have rules in place within 100 days.
>
> Only if the laws exist already. Some have indicated that new laws
> might be needed. That could take a while to sort out. Particularly if
> the Republicans control either or both Houses of Congress.

That wasn't part of her claim. She will have new clear rules within
100 days if elected.

>>Why do *you* believe that it is an excellent policy to have the
>>federal government involved in regulating grocery prices?
>
> I said it was an excellent /first/ policy. I did not say it was
> excellent as such. It is a good place to start. She can make some fine
> declarations from the Oval Office on the topic. Whether it actually
> goes anywhere who can say? This is politics, after all. Did the Wall
> get build with Mexico paying? Don't think so.

What a patronising view of Harris. It's a first policy so of course
it isn't expected to be of a high quality. She will learn to play with
the adults later on.

>>> Note: I buy a lot of store brands, and some of those, at least, have
>>> dropped back down, at least a bit. Those concerned about grocery store
>>> reporting should keep two things in mind:
>>> 1) If the stores always mark up the items they sell by the same
>>> amount, then /they/ aren't gouging.
>>> 2) If restricted to larger stores, or chains, then the report would
>>> probably be done by a computer anyway. We need not picture 100 new
>>> employees just to keep track of prices.
>>
>>It's done by a computer, it's simple? Tell that the federal government -
>>how many multi-billion dollar computer programs have they abandoned over
>>the years?
>
> Do you really believe that a major corporation is somehow unable to
> tell exactly where every penny received from something it sold goes
> to? Cost of item, cost of overhead, cost of wages, profit, and any
> others? Not the CEO, perhaps, but some weenie three or four levels
> down in Accounting surely can.
> If they can't, then /they can't tell which lines/products make the
> most money for them/ and how can they make intelligent business
> decisions if they literally don't know what they are doing?

No, they can't. When they sell an item, they do not know what they
paid for it and what the overhead was. They know all the various
prices that they paid for that item category (eg $1 last month, $1.10
the month before) but they don't know which of those costs apply to
this particular item. They know what the expected wastage is of a
produce item, but they don't know whether the shipment for this
particular apple happened to be mostly spoiled because they don't know what
shipment it came from.

When your wholesale cost of eggs suddenly triples, what retail price
do you start charging and when? Some eggs will probably be sold at an
enormous markup, but that is not price gouging.

How about when everybody else's wholesale cost of eggs triples and they
double their retail prices, but you have a longer-term contract with your
supplier and are still paying the original rate? If you double your
retail price, you are not price gouging according to any legal definition
that I know of. Price gouging is defined as excess profits when selling
above the market rate.

That's a major reason why Harris's proposal is nonsense. Price gouging
is defined in terms of selling above market prices, and grocery
markets are local, not national. The state governments are reasonable
places for price gouging laws; the federal government has no expertise
in local markets. (The federal government absolutely has a place in
price collusion laws, forbidding industries from agreeing to
artificially high prices. But unfortunately for Harris, those laws
already exist.)

>>My supermarket has very low prices on basics ($2.49/gallon for milk),
>>but has a large selection of luxury and prepared items with a much
>>higher markup (I'm sure some of the sushi items are 200% or more). Are you
>>saying the federal government should have a say in this strategy?
>>
>>Their fruit prices normally vary by as much as a factor of 3 or more
>>throughout the year - it matters if they are getting them from local
>>orchards or Brazil. Are you saying the markup has to be the same
>>throughout the year?
>
> No. But it has to not triple when a pandemic hits unless there is a
> good economic reason for it. And "raking it in while I have the chance
> and devil take the hindmost" is not a good economic reason.

But where do you draw the line? Be precise.

Again, the issue is not the need for price collusion laws, those already
exist. The emphasis has to be on keeping fair competition in the
marketplace. Most of the conspiracy theories I've seen about grocery
prices imply collusion. But that's a complaint about enforcement of
existing laws.

>
> Which is why the effort, confined to the major corporations, should
> also start with historical research so an idea can be formed of what
> is normal and what is not.

>>Just what is this magical computer keeping track of at the federal level?
>
> What magical computer? I don't think they exist ... in this reality.
>
> Maybe in PTTP-land. In fact, I would think Russia would be a good
> place to look for such a machine. Or China.

You're the one that said all this is simple because it can be done on
a computer! Ridiculous.

Chris

[Paul S Person]

On 22 Aug 2024 13:50:01 GMT, Chris Buckley <***@sabir.com> wrote:

>On 2024-08-21, Paul S Person <***@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
>> On 20 Aug 2024 15:05:59 GMT, Chris Buckley <***@sabir.com> wrote:
>>
>>>On 2024-08-19, Paul S Person <***@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
>>
>><snip-a-bit>
>>
>>>> The claim was that she proposed "freezing food prices and making
>>>> grocery stores report any changes in their prices".
>>>>
>>>> Your quote simply doesn't back that up in any way.
>>>>
>>>> But keep on trying. Who can say what Kamala may have said, say, 15
>>>> years ago in a private conversation now being outed by someone from
>>>> memory with no backup at all. Or some source of similar likely
>>>> validity.
>>>
>>>Yes, freezing prices is a slight exageration of putting price controls
>>>on, but only slight. The mechanisms for enforcing them are the same: how
>>>do you envision them as different?
>>
>> It is a PTTP, pure and simple.
>>
>> I don't "envision" either as likely any time soon.
>>
>> Price /controls/ imply rationing. As during WWII. You control the
>> prices because otherwise scarcity will cause them to rise.
>
>You are using your own private definitions again. Price control is
>a general economic term that includes things like price gouging laws,
>price freezing, rent control, minimum wages. None of these imply
>rationing, which is a logistics term. Both rationing and price controls
>can be used to solve the same problem, but if anything, it is rationing
>that implies price controls.

And yet it is you yourself who asked me to /distinguish/ them.

This says a lot about your character, you know.

>> Price /gouging/ is handled by putting people in prison. It is a crime.
>> Or should be. The problem, of course, is telling when it is happening
>> -- and who is doing it.
>>
>>>> This is actually an /excellent/ first policy -- going directly at the
>>>> malefactors.
>>>
>>>What malefactors???
>>
>> That's my point: the people actually doing the price gouging should be
>> identified before solutions are proposed.
>>>>However, I would suggest she have someone actually
>>>> /study/ the situation to see if the problem she is trying to solve
>>>> actually exists -- that is, that the higher grocery prices actually
>>>> /are/ price-gouging and not legitimate economic behavior.
>>>>
>>>> There is no point in solving a problem that does not exist.
>>>
>>>I agree with all of this. I would have no objection (other than a
>>>mild waste of time and money) if she had proposed an urgent study of grocery
>>>prices and whether "price gouging" is happening. But she didn't.
>>>
>>>She said that the problem exists and that it is very urgent for the
>>>federal government to have rules and regulations right now to stop them.
>>>That it is so clear cut that she will have rules in place within 100 days.
>>
>> Only if the laws exist already. Some have indicated that new laws
>> might be needed. That could take a while to sort out. Particularly if
>> the Republicans control either or both Houses of Congress.
>
>That wasn't part of her claim. She will have new clear rules within
>100 days if elected.
>
>>>Why do *you* believe that it is an excellent policy to have the
>>>federal government involved in regulating grocery prices?
>>
>> I said it was an excellent /first/ policy. I did not say it was
>> excellent as such. It is a good place to start. She can make some fine
>> declarations from the Oval Office on the topic. Whether it actually
>> goes anywhere who can say? This is politics, after all. Did the Wall
>> get build with Mexico paying? Don't think so.
>
>What a patronising view of Harris. It's a first policy so of course
>it isn't expected to be of a high quality. She will learn to play with
>the adults later on.

It is a political campaign speech. Just like Trump's Wall, paid by
Mexico. What happens after she gets in will become clear over time.
Quite possibly little or nothing -- as with Trump's Wall.

OK, the chance of someone scamming people by claiming to be doing it
on his own (as happened with the Wall) is probably a bit less.

>>>> Note: I buy a lot of store brands, and some of those, at least, have
>>>> dropped back down, at least a bit. Those concerned about grocery store
>>>> reporting should keep two things in mind:
>>>> 1) If the stores always mark up the items they sell by the same
>>>> amount, then /they/ aren't gouging.
>>>> 2) If restricted to larger stores, or chains, then the report would
>>>> probably be done by a computer anyway. We need not picture 100 new
>>>> employees just to keep track of prices.
>>>
>>>It's done by a computer, it's simple? Tell that the federal government -
>>>how many multi-billion dollar computer programs have they abandoned over
>>>the years?
>>
>> Do you really believe that a major corporation is somehow unable to
>> tell exactly where every penny received from something it sold goes
>> to? Cost of item, cost of overhead, cost of wages, profit, and any
>> others? Not the CEO, perhaps, but some weenie three or four levels
>> down in Accounting surely can.
>> If they can't, then /they can't tell which lines/products make the
>> most money for them/ and how can they make intelligent business
>> decisions if they literally don't know what they are doing?
>
>No, they can't. When they sell an item, they do not know what they
>paid for it and what the overhead was. They know all the various
>prices that they paid for that item category (eg $1 last month, $1.10
>the month before) but they don't know which of those costs apply to
>this particular item. They know what the expected wastage is of a
>produce item, but they don't know whether the shipment for this
>particular apple happened to be mostly spoiled because they don't know what
>shipment it came from.

Then they aren't in business. They are just pretending.

>When your wholesale cost of eggs suddenly triples, what retail price
>do you start charging and when? Some eggs will probably be sold at an
>enormous markup, but that is not price gouging.

/That/ would be an economic justification for an increased markup:
having to make enough from the current items to purchase more.

But, of course, they would have to know what they paid for the current
items. According to you, they know no such thing, and so cannot tell
if the price of eggs is going up or not.

>How about when everybody else's wholesale cost of eggs triples and they
>double their retail prices, but you have a longer-term contract with your
>supplier and are still paying the original rate? If you double your
>retail price, you are not price gouging according to any legal definition
>that I know of. Price gouging is defined as excess profits when selling
>above the market rate.

Perhaps not, but if they are charging just as much when they can
charge less, they are either in an illegal price-fixing cartel or are
not in business.

>That's a major reason why Harris's proposal is nonsense. Price gouging
>is defined in terms of selling above market prices, and grocery
>markets are local, not national. The state governments are reasonable
>places for price gouging laws; the federal government has no expertise
>in local markets. (The federal government absolutely has a place in
>price collusion laws, forbidding industries from agreeing to
>artificially high prices. But unfortunately for Harris, those laws
>already exist.)

The laws exist but are they being enforced? The last memorable
antitrust action I recall was Microsoft, which was very interesting in
explaining just why OS/2 failed, but didn't result in splitting up
Microsoft into competing units with no common direction.

Suppose what she is /really/ saying is that the antirust laws will be
applied to the food industry?

>>>My supermarket has very low prices on basics ($2.49/gallon for milk),
>>>but has a large selection of luxury and prepared items with a much
>>>higher markup (I'm sure some of the sushi items are 200% or more). Are you
>>>saying the federal government should have a say in this strategy?
>>>
>>>Their fruit prices normally vary by as much as a factor of 3 or more
>>>throughout the year - it matters if they are getting them from local
>>>orchards or Brazil. Are you saying the markup has to be the same
>>>throughout the year?
>>
>> No. But it has to not triple when a pandemic hits unless there is a
>> good economic reason for it. And "raking it in while I have the chance
>> and devil take the hindmost" is not a good economic reason.
>
>But where do you draw the line? Be precise.
>
>Again, the issue is not the need for price collusion laws, those already
>exist. The emphasis has to be on keeping fair competition in the
>marketplace. Most of the conspiracy theories I've seen about grocery
>prices imply collusion. But that's a complaint about enforcement of
>existing laws.

And it may be Kamala's complaint as well. Which she should be able to
remedy as President with a few judicious appointments and
speechifying.

>> Which is why the effort, confined to the major corporations, should
>> also start with historical research so an idea can be formed of what
>> is normal and what is not.
>
>>>Just what is this magical computer keeping track of at the federal level?
>>
>> What magical computer? I don't think they exist ... in this reality.
>>
>> Maybe in PTTP-land. In fact, I would think Russia would be a good
>> place to look for such a machine. Or China.
>
>You're the one that said all this is simple because it can be done on
>a computer! Ridiculous.

I said that a /major corporation/ can provide the historical and
current data that they based the decisions being investigated on
without hiring 100 clerks to write the data on parchment with quill
pens by using their computers to produce it.
--
"Here lies the Tuscan poet Aretino,
Who evil spoke of everyone but God,
Giving as his excuse, 'I never knew him.'"

[Chris Buckley]

On 2024-08-22, Paul S Person <***@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
> On 22 Aug 2024 13:50:01 GMT, Chris Buckley <***@sabir.com> wrote:
>
>>On 2024-08-21, Paul S Person <***@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
>>> On 20 Aug 2024 15:05:59 GMT, Chris Buckley <***@sabir.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>On 2024-08-19, Paul S Person <***@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>><snip-a-bit>
>>>
>>>>> The claim was that she proposed "freezing food prices and making
>>>>> grocery stores report any changes in their prices".
>>>>>
>>>>> Your quote simply doesn't back that up in any way.
>>>>>
>>>>> But keep on trying. Who can say what Kamala may have said, say, 15
>>>>> years ago in a private conversation now being outed by someone from
>>>>> memory with no backup at all. Or some source of similar likely
>>>>> validity.
>>>>
>>>>Yes, freezing prices is a slight exageration of putting price controls
>>>>on, but only slight. The mechanisms for enforcing them are the same: how
>>>>do you envision them as different?
>>>
>>> It is a PTTP, pure and simple.
>>>
>>> I don't "envision" either as likely any time soon.
>>>
>>> Price /controls/ imply rationing. As during WWII. You control the
>>> prices because otherwise scarcity will cause them to rise.
>>
>>You are using your own private definitions again. Price control is
>>a general economic term that includes things like price gouging laws,
>>price freezing, rent control, minimum wages. None of these imply
>>rationing, which is a logistics term. Both rationing and price controls
>>can be used to solve the same problem, but if anything, it is rationing
>>that implies price controls.
>
> And yet it is you yourself who asked me to /distinguish/ them.
> This says a lot about your character, you know.

What does it say about my character? Be precise.
You make no logical sense at all with your statement. "A implies B" does
not in any way mean that A and B are identical.
If A is "I have at lest 5 apples"
and B is " I have at least 3 apples"
then A implies B is a true statement.
But that does not mean that A and B are the same!

I didn't ask you to distingush anything. I said flatly that price
controls do not imply rationing. I gave 4 subcategories of price
control, all of which do not involve rationing. You were wrong.
Rather than address that fact, you invent a whole new theory of logic,
evidently to insult me.

>>> Price /gouging/ is handled by putting people in prison. It is a crime.
>>> Or should be. The problem, of course, is telling when it is happening
>>> -- and who is doing it.
>>>
>>>>> This is actually an /excellent/ first policy -- going directly at the
>>>>> malefactors.
>>>>
>>>>What malefactors???
>>>
>>> That's my point: the people actually doing the price gouging should be
>>> identified before solutions are proposed.
>>>>>However, I would suggest she have someone actually
>>>>> /study/ the situation to see if the problem she is trying to solve
>>>>> actually exists -- that is, that the higher grocery prices actually
>>>>> /are/ price-gouging and not legitimate economic behavior.
>>>>>
>>>>> There is no point in solving a problem that does not exist.
>>>>
>>>>I agree with all of this. I would have no objection (other than a
>>>>mild waste of time and money) if she had proposed an urgent study of grocery
>>>>prices and whether "price gouging" is happening. But she didn't.
>>>>
>>>>She said that the problem exists and that it is very urgent for the
>>>>federal government to have rules and regulations right now to stop them.
>>>>That it is so clear cut that she will have rules in place within 100 days.
>>>
>>> Only if the laws exist already. Some have indicated that new laws
>>> might be needed. That could take a while to sort out. Particularly if
>>> the Republicans control either or both Houses of Congress.
>>
>>That wasn't part of her claim. She will have new clear rules within
>>100 days if elected.
>>
>>>>Why do *you* believe that it is an excellent policy to have the
>>>>federal government involved in regulating grocery prices?
>>>
>>> I said it was an excellent /first/ policy. I did not say it was
>>> excellent as such. It is a good place to start. She can make some fine
>>> declarations from the Oval Office on the topic. Whether it actually
>>> goes anywhere who can say? This is politics, after all. Did the Wall
>>> get build with Mexico paying? Don't think so.
>>
>>What a patronising view of Harris. It's a first policy so of course
>>it isn't expected to be of a high quality. She will learn to play with
>>the adults later on.
>
> It is a political campaign speech. Just like Trump's Wall, paid by
> Mexico. What happens after she gets in will become clear over time.
> Quite possibly little or nothing -- as with Trump's Wall.
>
> OK, the chance of someone scamming people by claiming to be doing it
> on his own (as happened with the Wall) is probably a bit less.

How does that affect your patronising statement? You're the one that is
saying it is excellent only because she is a beginner at issuing policies.

(So you are saying nothing happening with Trump's wall is Trump's fault
because he didn't follow through? I thought that the Democrats shutting
the entire government down for 35 days rather than fund the wall had something
to do with it. Not one of the Democrats' shining moments, and not one they
are mentioning now for some reason!)

>>>>> Note: I buy a lot of store brands, and some of those, at least, have
>>>>> dropped back down, at least a bit. Those concerned about grocery store
>>>>> reporting should keep two things in mind:
>>>>> 1) If the stores always mark up the items they sell by the same
>>>>> amount, then /they/ aren't gouging.
>>>>> 2) If restricted to larger stores, or chains, then the report would
>>>>> probably be done by a computer anyway. We need not picture 100 new
>>>>> employees just to keep track of prices.
>>>>
>>>>It's done by a computer, it's simple? Tell that the federal government -
>>>>how many multi-billion dollar computer programs have they abandoned over
>>>>the years?
>>>
>>> Do you really believe that a major corporation is somehow unable to
>>> tell exactly where every penny received from something it sold goes
>>> to? Cost of item, cost of overhead, cost of wages, profit, and any
>>> others? Not the CEO, perhaps, but some weenie three or four levels
>>> down in Accounting surely can.
>>> If they can't, then /they can't tell which lines/products make the
>>> most money for them/ and how can they make intelligent business
>>> decisions if they literally don't know what they are doing?
>>
>>No, they can't. When they sell an item, they do not know what they
>>paid for it and what the overhead was. They know all the various
>>prices that they paid for that item category (eg $1 last month, $1.10
>>the month before) but they don't know which of those costs apply to
>>this particular item. They know what the expected wastage is of a
>>produce item, but they don't know whether the shipment for this
>>particular apple happened to be mostly spoiled because they don't know what
>>shipment it came from.
>
> Then they aren't in business. They are just pretending.

No. I know of no grocery store out there that is able to match every
item sold with the amount they paid for it. You are living in your
own fantasy world of your own imagination.

>>When your wholesale cost of eggs suddenly triples, what retail price
>>do you start charging and when? Some eggs will probably be sold at an
>>enormous markup, but that is not price gouging.
>
> /That/ would be an economic justification for an increased markup:
> having to make enough from the current items to purchase more.
>
> But, of course, they would have to know what they paid for the current
> items. According to you, they know no such thing, and so cannot tell
> if the price of eggs is going up or not.
>
>>How about when everybody else's wholesale cost of eggs triples and they
>>double their retail prices, but you have a longer-term contract with your
>>supplier and are still paying the original rate? If you double your
>>retail price, you are not price gouging according to any legal definition
>>that I know of. Price gouging is defined as excess profits when selling
>>above the market rate.
>
> Perhaps not, but if they are charging just as much when they can
> charge less, they are either in an illegal price-fixing cartel or are
> not in business.

No, you make money by charging what the free market allows.

>>That's a major reason why Harris's proposal is nonsense. Price gouging
>>is defined in terms of selling above market prices, and grocery
>>markets are local, not national. The state governments are reasonable
>>places for price gouging laws; the federal government has no expertise
>>in local markets. (The federal government absolutely has a place in
>>price collusion laws, forbidding industries from agreeing to
>>artificially high prices. But unfortunately for Harris, those laws
>>already exist.)
>
> The laws exist but are they being enforced? The last memorable
> antitrust action I recall was Microsoft, which was very interesting in
> explaining just why OS/2 failed, but didn't result in splitting up
> Microsoft into competing units with no common direction.
>
> Suppose what she is /really/ saying is that the antirust laws will be
> applied to the food industry?

Antitrust breakups and price collusion/fixing are different things.
Wikipedia lists half-a-dozen major price fixing prosecutions in the past 20
years; there are many more minor ones both at the federal level and
at the state/local level. It's constantly being looked at.

>>>>My supermarket has very low prices on basics ($2.49/gallon for milk),
>>>>but has a large selection of luxury and prepared items with a much
>>>>higher markup (I'm sure some of the sushi items are 200% or more). Are you
>>>>saying the federal government should have a say in this strategy?
>>>>
>>>>Their fruit prices normally vary by as much as a factor of 3 or more
>>>>throughout the year - it matters if they are getting them from local
>>>>orchards or Brazil. Are you saying the markup has to be the same
>>>>throughout the year?
>>>
>>> No. But it has to not triple when a pandemic hits unless there is a
>>> good economic reason for it. And "raking it in while I have the chance
>>> and devil take the hindmost" is not a good economic reason.
>>
>>But where do you draw the line? Be precise.
>>
>>Again, the issue is not the need for price collusion laws, those already
>>exist. The emphasis has to be on keeping fair competition in the
>>marketplace. Most of the conspiracy theories I've seen about grocery
>>prices imply collusion. But that's a complaint about enforcement of
>>existing laws.
>
> And it may be Kamala's complaint as well. Which she should be able to
> remedy as President with a few judicious appointments and
> speechifying.
>
>>> Which is why the effort, confined to the major corporations, should
>>> also start with historical research so an idea can be formed of what
>>> is normal and what is not.
>>
>>>>Just what is this magical computer keeping track of at the federal level?
>>>
>>> What magical computer? I don't think they exist ... in this reality.
>>>
>>> Maybe in PTTP-land. In fact, I would think Russia would be a good
>>> place to look for such a machine. Or China.
>>
>>You're the one that said all this is simple because it can be done on
>>a computer! Ridiculous.
>
> I said that a /major corporation/ can provide the historical and
> current data that they based the decisions being investigated on
> without hiring 100 clerks to write the data on parchment with quill
> pens by using their computers to produce it.

As I said, you are living in a fantasy world if you think you can get
all the information you've cited that easily (even if it did exist,
which it doesn't). If you restrict the info wanted to for a specific
item, the quantities of it sold on particular dates at what prices,
then a major supermarket chain might be able to get away with only
spending tens of millions of dollars and a hundred employees (most
employees will be verifying compliance with the federal regulations,
not actually getting the info.) That won't be enough info; the feds
have to handle cases like when investigating eggs: "buy a loaf of
bread for $8 and a dozen eggs will only cost $2", but at least is
doable.

But if you add costs and profit margins into the info wanted, you add
a couple of orders of magnitude to initial costs and employees needed.
I worked as a research subcontractor to the federal government for 10
years. Not a single overall contract was signed by the time I started
any subcontract. The longest, with Cornell University, took over 10
months to sign. All of that time on every contract was spent on
agreeing how costs and overhead should be accounted for. (And Cornell
signs hundreds of federal contracts every year.) Verifying accounting
to the federal government is very expensive. Saying a computer (whether
magical or not) solves the problem is ridiculous.

Chris

[Cryptoengineer]

On 8/22/2024 11:54 AM, Paul S Person wrote:
> On 22 Aug 2024 13:50:01 GMT, Chris Buckley <***@sabir.com> wrote:
>
>> On 2024-08-21, Paul S Person <***@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
>>> On 20 Aug 2024 15:05:59 GMT, Chris Buckley <***@sabir.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 2024-08-19, Paul S Person <***@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>> <snip-a-bit>
>>>
>>>>> The claim was that she proposed "freezing food prices and making
>>>>> grocery stores report any changes in their prices".
>>>>>
>>>>> Your quote simply doesn't back that up in any way.
>>>>>
>>>>> But keep on trying. Who can say what Kamala may have said, say, 15
>>>>> years ago in a private conversation now being outed by someone from
>>>>> memory with no backup at all. Or some source of similar likely
>>>>> validity.
>>>>
>>>> Yes, freezing prices is a slight exageration of putting price controls
>>>> on, but only slight. The mechanisms for enforcing them are the same: how
>>>> do you envision them as different?
>>>
>>> It is a PTTP, pure and simple.
>>>
>>> I don't "envision" either as likely any time soon.
>>>
>>> Price /controls/ imply rationing. As during WWII. You control the
>>> prices because otherwise scarcity will cause them to rise.
>>
>> You are using your own private definitions again. Price control is
>> a general economic term that includes things like price gouging laws,
>> price freezing, rent control, minimum wages. None of these imply
>> rationing, which is a logistics term. Both rationing and price controls
>> can be used to solve the same problem, but if anything, it is rationing
>> that implies price controls.
>
> And yet it is you yourself who asked me to /distinguish/ them.
>
> This says a lot about your character, you know.
>
>>> Price /gouging/ is handled by putting people in prison. It is a crime.
>>> Or should be. The problem, of course, is telling when it is happening
>>> -- and who is doing it.
>>>
>>>>> This is actually an /excellent/ first policy -- going directly at the
>>>>> malefactors.
>>>>
>>>> What malefactors???
>>>
>>> That's my point: the people actually doing the price gouging should be
>>> identified before solutions are proposed.
>>>>> However, I would suggest she have someone actually
>>>>> /study/ the situation to see if the problem she is trying to solve
>>>>> actually exists -- that is, that the higher grocery prices actually
>>>>> /are/ price-gouging and not legitimate economic behavior.
>>>>>
>>>>> There is no point in solving a problem that does not exist.
>>>>
>>>> I agree with all of this. I would have no objection (other than a
>>>> mild waste of time and money) if she had proposed an urgent study of grocery
>>>> prices and whether "price gouging" is happening. But she didn't.
>>>>
>>>> She said that the problem exists and that it is very urgent for the
>>>> federal government to have rules and regulations right now to stop them.
>>>> That it is so clear cut that she will have rules in place within 100 days.
>>>
>>> Only if the laws exist already. Some have indicated that new laws
>>> might be needed. That could take a while to sort out. Particularly if
>>> the Republicans control either or both Houses of Congress.
>>
>> That wasn't part of her claim. She will have new clear rules within
>> 100 days if elected.
>>
>>>> Why do *you* believe that it is an excellent policy to have the
>>>> federal government involved in regulating grocery prices?
>>>
>>> I said it was an excellent /first/ policy. I did not say it was
>>> excellent as such. It is a good place to start. She can make some fine
>>> declarations from the Oval Office on the topic. Whether it actually
>>> goes anywhere who can say? This is politics, after all. Did the Wall
>>> get build with Mexico paying? Don't think so.
>>
>> What a patronising view of Harris. It's a first policy so of course
>> it isn't expected to be of a high quality. She will learn to play with
>> the adults later on.
>
> It is a political campaign speech. Just like Trump's Wall, paid by
> Mexico. What happens after she gets in will become clear over time.
> Quite possibly little or nothing -- as with Trump's Wall.
>
> OK, the chance of someone scamming people by claiming to be doing it
> on his own (as happened with the Wall) is probably a bit less.
>
>>>>> Note: I buy a lot of store brands, and some of those, at least, have
>>>>> dropped back down, at least a bit. Those concerned about grocery store
>>>>> reporting should keep two things in mind:
>>>>> 1) If the stores always mark up the items they sell by the same
>>>>> amount, then /they/ aren't gouging.
>>>>> 2) If restricted to larger stores, or chains, then the report would
>>>>> probably be done by a computer anyway. We need not picture 100 new
>>>>> employees just to keep track of prices.
>>>>
>>>> It's done by a computer, it's simple? Tell that the federal government -
>>>> how many multi-billion dollar computer programs have they abandoned over
>>>> the years?
>>>
>>> Do you really believe that a major corporation is somehow unable to
>>> tell exactly where every penny received from something it sold goes
>>> to? Cost of item, cost of overhead, cost of wages, profit, and any
>>> others? Not the CEO, perhaps, but some weenie three or four levels
>>> down in Accounting surely can.
>>> If they can't, then /they can't tell which lines/products make the
>>> most money for them/ and how can they make intelligent business
>>> decisions if they literally don't know what they are doing?
>>
>> No, they can't. When they sell an item, they do not know what they
>> paid for it and what the overhead was. They know all the various
>> prices that they paid for that item category (eg $1 last month, $1.10
>> the month before) but they don't know which of those costs apply to
>> this particular item. They know what the expected wastage is of a
>> produce item, but they don't know whether the shipment for this
>> particular apple happened to be mostly spoiled because they don't know what
>> shipment it came from.
>
> Then they aren't in business. They are just pretending.
>
>> When your wholesale cost of eggs suddenly triples, what retail price
>> do you start charging and when? Some eggs will probably be sold at an
>> enormous markup, but that is not price gouging.
>
> /That/ would be an economic justification for an increased markup:
> having to make enough from the current items to purchase more.
>
> But, of course, they would have to know what they paid for the current
> items. According to you, they know no such thing, and so cannot tell
> if the price of eggs is going up or not.
>
>> How about when everybody else's wholesale cost of eggs triples and they
>> double their retail prices, but you have a longer-term contract with your
>> supplier and are still paying the original rate? If you double your
>> retail price, you are not price gouging according to any legal definition
>> that I know of. Price gouging is defined as excess profits when selling
>> above the market rate.
>
> Perhaps not, but if they are charging just as much when they can
> charge less, they are either in an illegal price-fixing cartel or are
> not in business.
>
>> That's a major reason why Harris's proposal is nonsense. Price gouging
>> is defined in terms of selling above market prices, and grocery
>> markets are local, not national. The state governments are reasonable
>> places for price gouging laws; the federal government has no expertise
>> in local markets. (The federal government absolutely has a place in
>> price collusion laws, forbidding industries from agreeing to
>> artificially high prices. But unfortunately for Harris, those laws
>> already exist.)
>
> The laws exist but are they being enforced? The last memorable
> antitrust action I recall was Microsoft, which was very interesting in
> explaining just why OS/2 failed, but didn't result in splitting up
> Microsoft into competing units with no common direction.

I guess you didn't notice recently when Google Search was declared a
monopoly by a Federal court, the DoJ is looking into breaking it up.

https://www.investopedia.com/could-the-us-government-break-up-google-after-monopoly-ruling-8695107

pt

[Cryptoengineer]

On 8/17/2024 5:51 AM, D wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, 16 Aug 2024, Lynn McGuire wrote:
>
>> On 8/16/2024 4:55 PM, William Hyde wrote:
>>> Lynn McGuire wrote:
>>>> On 8/16/2024 1:26 PM, BCFD 36 wrote:
>>>>> Awhile back, The Three Body Problem was mentioned. In that thread,
>>>>> there was no mention of the current Netflix version. Was this
>>>>> mentioned somewhere else and I just missed it? Google groups is of
>>>>> no help any more.
>>>>>
>>>>> I have just started the series and I am intrigued, so far. Just two
>>>>> episodes. My wife is rather "meh" about it, but she said the same
>>>>> thing about Star Trek 1 which in reality she HATED so I may be
>>>>> watching it after she goes to bed.
>>>>>
>>>>> ----------------
>>>>>
>>>>> Dave Scruggs
>>>>> Senior Software Engineer - Lockheed Martin, et. al (mostly Retired)
>>>>> Captain - Boulder Creek Fire (Retired)
>>>>> Board of Directors - Boulder Creek Fire Protection District (What
>>>>> was I thinking?)
>>>>
>>>> I did not like the Netflix version, have yet to read the book.  Too
>>>> much time spent on the China Cultural Revolution and their violence
>>>> against the educated.  Felt like a Children of the Corn mini
>>>> series.  I gave up after two episodes.
>>>
>>> I've known several people whose lives were damaged by that event.
>>> And these were the lucky ones, who made it to the west.
>>>>
>>>
>>> One scientist I knew never got over it, especially the abuse suffered
>>> by her mother.  One might have expected her father, an educated man
>>> who had lived in the West and still had children living there to be
>>> as big a target. But he was left alone, she said, because he was a
>>> renowned gerontologist and  the Party leadership was getting older.
>>>
>>>
>>> Another distinguished scientist told me he reached the last year of
>>> secondary education only to realize that he'd learned absolutely
>>> nothing owing to the constant meetings and demonstrations.  Ignoring
>>> his teachers, he packed four years of school into one.  Judging by
>>> his subsequent career, he kept up that level of effort for  the next
>>> few decades.
>>>
>>>
>>> William Hyde
>>
>> One of my Dad's mainland Chinese grad students from OU lived with us
>> for a couple of years from 1973 to 1974 and worked for my Dad from
>> 1973 to 1995. He came over to the USA in 1966 or 1967 and got a PhD in
>> Chemical Engineering from OU in 1973.  I heard enough stories from him
>> about growing on a farm in China, living in a cave, starving all the
>> time.  If our family did not eat everything at supper then he would
>> finish everything off.  It took my mother several months break him of
>> that habit.  But he never got fat.  He never mentioned anything about
>> the Cultural Revolution but I suspect it was the reason why he left
>> China.
>>
>> He was incredibly smart, he would give me an algorithm and I would
>> code it up in Fortran 66 for him in a subroutine and give him the card
>> deck. He was very submissive, he would never look you in the face,
>> would always look down.  He went back to mainland China in 1995 to
>> help with his sister's export business.  Sadly, he soon had a heart
>> attack and passed away.  His sister was kind enough to call my father
>> and tell us.
>>
>> I know several people in the USA who had to leave Iran when they had
>> their cultural revolution.  Mostly engineers working for USA companies
>> like Dupont in Iran.  I've gotten a few stories from them, grim, very
>> grim.  One of my classmates at TAMU disappeared at the midyear of our
>> junior year in 1980 when the Iranian Embassy in the USA sent him a
>> letter cutting off his funds and ordering him to come home.  They also
>> revoked his visa but President Reagan gave all those people green card
>> status in 1981.  He refused to go home to Iran since he was a nephew
>> of the Shah, he figured that they would shoot him the minute he
>> stepped off the plane.
>>
>> In other words, the various Cultural Revolutions are a little too real
>> for me and I do not enjoy reading about or viewing them.
>>
>> Lynn
>>
>
> With this historical luggage I can never understand how people in europe
> can insist on voting for socialists. Give them enough power and they
> tend to repeat themselves. Just look at the socialist UK government now
> cracking down on free speech. Very sad.

I concur. I'm half Estonian, and have met relatives who were exiled to
Siberia in the 1950s as 'rich peasants'. (They got back after about a
decade).

When I was there in 1985, I was followed as I walked around town, and
our hotel rooms were bugged.

Russia was like that under the Tsar.
Russia was like that under the Soviets, with wider reach.
Russia is still like that under Putin.

Russia will Russia.

Moskovia delenda est.

pt

[D]

On Sat, 17 Aug 2024, Cryptoengineer wrote:

> On 8/17/2024 5:51 AM, D wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Fri, 16 Aug 2024, Lynn McGuire wrote:
>>
>>> On 8/16/2024 4:55 PM, William Hyde wrote:
>>>> Lynn McGuire wrote:
>>>>> On 8/16/2024 1:26 PM, BCFD 36 wrote:
>>>>>> Awhile back, The Three Body Problem was mentioned. In that thread,
>>>>>> there was no mention of the current Netflix version. Was this mentioned
>>>>>> somewhere else and I just missed it? Google groups is of no help any
>>>>>> more.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I have just started the series and I am intrigued, so far. Just two
>>>>>> episodes. My wife is rather "meh" about it, but she said the same thing
>>>>>> about Star Trek 1 which in reality she HATED so I may be watching it
>>>>>> after she goes to bed.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ----------------
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Dave Scruggs
>>>>>> Senior Software Engineer - Lockheed Martin, et. al (mostly Retired)
>>>>>> Captain - Boulder Creek Fire (Retired)
>>>>>> Board of Directors - Boulder Creek Fire Protection District (What was I
>>>>>> thinking?)
>>>>>
>>>>> I did not like the Netflix version, have yet to read the book.  Too much
>>>>> time spent on the China Cultural Revolution and their violence against
>>>>> the educated.  Felt like a Children of the Corn mini series.  I gave up
>>>>> after two episodes.
>>>>
>>>> I've known several people whose lives were damaged by that event. And
>>>> these were the lucky ones, who made it to the west.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> One scientist I knew never got over it, especially the abuse suffered by
>>>> her mother.  One might have expected her father, an educated man who had
>>>> lived in the West and still had children living there to be as big a
>>>> target. But he was left alone, she said, because he was a renowned
>>>> gerontologist and  the Party leadership was getting older.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Another distinguished scientist told me he reached the last year of
>>>> secondary education only to realize that he'd learned absolutely nothing
>>>> owing to the constant meetings and demonstrations.  Ignoring his
>>>> teachers, he packed four years of school into one.  Judging by his
>>>> subsequent career, he kept up that level of effort for  the next few
>>>> decades.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> William Hyde
>>>
>>> One of my Dad's mainland Chinese grad students from OU lived with us for a
>>> couple of years from 1973 to 1974 and worked for my Dad from 1973 to 1995.
>>> He came over to the USA in 1966 or 1967 and got a PhD in Chemical
>>> Engineering from OU in 1973.  I heard enough stories from him about
>>> growing on a farm in China, living in a cave, starving all the time.  If
>>> our family did not eat everything at supper then he would finish
>>> everything off.  It took my mother several months break him of that
>>> habit.  But he never got fat.  He never mentioned anything about the
>>> Cultural Revolution but I suspect it was the reason why he left China.
>>>
>>> He was incredibly smart, he would give me an algorithm and I would code it
>>> up in Fortran 66 for him in a subroutine and give him the card deck. He
>>> was very submissive, he would never look you in the face, would always
>>> look down.  He went back to mainland China in 1995 to help with his
>>> sister's export business.  Sadly, he soon had a heart attack and passed
>>> away.  His sister was kind enough to call my father and tell us.
>>>
>>> I know several people in the USA who had to leave Iran when they had their
>>> cultural revolution.  Mostly engineers working for USA companies like
>>> Dupont in Iran.  I've gotten a few stories from them, grim, very grim. 
>>> One of my classmates at TAMU disappeared at the midyear of our junior year
>>> in 1980 when the Iranian Embassy in the USA sent him a letter cutting off
>>> his funds and ordering him to come home.  They also revoked his visa but
>>> President Reagan gave all those people green card status in 1981.  He
>>> refused to go home to Iran since he was a nephew of the Shah, he figured
>>> that they would shoot him the minute he stepped off the plane.
>>>
>>> In other words, the various Cultural Revolutions are a little too real for
>>> me and I do not enjoy reading about or viewing them.
>>>
>>> Lynn
>>>
>>
>> With this historical luggage I can never understand how people in europe
>> can insist on voting for socialists. Give them enough power and they tend
>> to repeat themselves. Just look at the socialist UK government now cracking
>> down on free speech. Very sad.
>
> I concur. I'm half Estonian, and have met relatives who were exiled to
> Siberia in the 1950s as 'rich peasants'. (They got back after about a
> decade).
>
> When I was there in 1985, I was followed as I walked around town, and
> our hotel rooms were bugged.
>
> Russia was like that under the Tsar.
> Russia was like that under the Soviets, with wider reach.
> Russia is still like that under Putin.
>
> Russia will Russia.
>
> Moskovia delenda est.
>
> pt

I have heard many similar stories and to me it is a mystery why the
russians are not wildly rebelling? Are they so used to it as not to see
that it is not normal or that things could actually be better? Are they
masochists?

I have an acquaintance and his grandfather fled from estonia to sweden
around the time of ww2. But the authoritarian memory is long. When his
father was going on a school trip that would take them through DDR he flew
since his parents did not want to risk him being captured by the soviet
union.

[Scott Dorsey]

Cryptoengineer <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>On 8/17/2024 5:51 AM, D wrote:
>>
>> With this historical luggage I can never understand how people in europe
>> can insist on voting for socialists. Give them enough power and they
>> tend to repeat themselves. Just look at the socialist UK government now
>> cracking down on free speech. Very sad.
>
>I concur. I'm half Estonian, and have met relatives who were exiled to
>Siberia in the 1950s as 'rich peasants'. (They got back after about a
>decade).
>
>When I was there in 1985, I was followed as I walked around town, and
>our hotel rooms were bugged.
>
>Russia was like that under the Tsar.
>Russia was like that under the Soviets, with wider reach.
>Russia is still like that under Putin.

Yes. This has nothing to do with socialism, this has to do with Russians
being Russians. Before Russia was socialist, they were like that. After
they turned into a monarchy after the death of Lenin, they were like that.
When the wall fell and they were forced to open to the outside world and
enact democratic reforms, they were like that. As the reforms failed and
they were taken over by a small number of oligarchs trained in the Soviet
style, they were like that.

Russians don't expect their government to work for them, and they don't
expect to have any control over their government. That government is
paranoid about invasion and wants control over as much area outside the
country as possible in order to provide a buffer from invasion. It is
obsessed with self-preservation at the expense of its population.

>Russia will Russia.
>
>Moskovia delenda est.

Indeed.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Paul S Person]

On Sat, 17 Aug 2024 11:51:46 +0200, D <***@example.net> wrote:

>
>
>On Fri, 16 Aug 2024, Lynn McGuire wrote:
>
>> On 8/16/2024 4:55 PM, William Hyde wrote:
>>> Lynn McGuire wrote:
>>>> On 8/16/2024 1:26 PM, BCFD 36 wrote:
>>>>> Awhile back, The Three Body Problem was mentioned. In that thread, there
>>>>> was no mention of the current Netflix version. Was this mentioned
>>>>> somewhere else and I just missed it? Google groups is of no help any
>>>>> more.
>>>>>
>>>>> I have just started the series and I am intrigued, so far. Just two
>>>>> episodes. My wife is rather "meh" about it, but she said the same thing
>>>>> about Star Trek 1 which in reality she HATED so I may be watching it
>>>>> after she goes to bed.
>>>>>
>>>>> ----------------
>>>>>
>>>>> Dave Scruggs
>>>>> Senior Software Engineer - Lockheed Martin, et. al (mostly Retired)
>>>>> Captain - Boulder Creek Fire (Retired)
>>>>> Board of Directors - Boulder Creek Fire Protection District (What was I
>>>>> thinking?)
>>>>
>>>> I did not like the Netflix version, have yet to read the book.  Too much
>>>> time spent on the China Cultural Revolution and their violence against the
>>>> educated.  Felt like a Children of the Corn mini series. I gave up after
>>>> two episodes.
>>>
>>> I've known several people whose lives were damaged by that event.  And
>>> these were the lucky ones, who made it to the west.
>>>>
>>>
>>> One scientist I knew never got over it, especially the abuse suffered by
>>> her mother.  One might have expected her father, an educated man who had
>>> lived in the West and still had children living there to be as big a
>>> target. But he was left alone, she said, because he was a renowned
>>> gerontologist and  the Party leadership was getting older.
>>>
>>>
>>> Another distinguished scientist told me he reached the last year of
>>> secondary education only to realize that he'd learned absolutely nothing
>>> owing to the constant meetings and demonstrations.  Ignoring his teachers,
>>> he packed four years of school into one.  Judging by his subsequent career,
>>> he kept up that level of effort for  the next few decades.
>>>
>>>
>>> William Hyde
>>
>> One of my Dad's mainland Chinese grad students from OU lived with us for a
>> couple of years from 1973 to 1974 and worked for my Dad from 1973 to 1995.
>> He came over to the USA in 1966 or 1967 and got a PhD in Chemical Engineering
>> from OU in 1973. I heard enough stories from him about growing on a farm in
>> China, living in a cave, starving all the time. If our family did not eat
>> everything at supper then he would finish everything off. It took my mother
>> several months break him of that habit. But he never got fat. He never
>> mentioned anything about the Cultural Revolution but I suspect it was the
>> reason why he left China.
>>
>> He was incredibly smart, he would give me an algorithm and I would code it up
>> in Fortran 66 for him in a subroutine and give him the card deck. He was very
>> submissive, he would never look you in the face, would always look down. He
>> went back to mainland China in 1995 to help with his sister's export
>> business. Sadly, he soon had a heart attack and passed away. His sister was
>> kind enough to call my father and tell us.
>>
>> I know several people in the USA who had to leave Iran when they had their
>> cultural revolution. Mostly engineers working for USA companies like Dupont
>> in Iran. I've gotten a few stories from them, grim, very grim. One of my
>> classmates at TAMU disappeared at the midyear of our junior year in 1980 when
>> the Iranian Embassy in the USA sent him a letter cutting off his funds and
>> ordering him to come home. They also revoked his visa but President Reagan
>> gave all those people green card status in 1981. He refused to go home to
>> Iran since he was a nephew of the Shah, he figured that they would shoot him
>> the minute he stepped off the plane.
>>
>> In other words, the various Cultural Revolutions are a little too real for me
>> and I do not enjoy reading about or viewing them.
>>
>> Lynn
>>
>
>With this historical luggage I can never understand how people in europe
>can insist on voting for socialists. Give them enough power and they tend
>to repeat themselves. Just look at the socialist UK government now
>cracking down on free speech. Very sad.

First, the UK has a different view of free speech than the USA.
/Their/ gummint can prohibit stories from running in newspapers at
all; ours can not, at least not before they have been published.

Second, they appear to be talking about holding people responsible for
the consequences of their actions. Starting a riot or crying "Fire!"
in a theater had /always/ been punishable speech. Just because they
are doing it online may make it harder to prove (depending on how the
law is written), but not impossible, and certainly not make it
unreasonable to try.

I should also point out that their ability to have US citizens
extradicted will depend on how the relevant treaty is written and the
relevant process. If this requires the crime charged to be a crime in
this country, then things may get a bit ... sticky. Consider the LA
prosecutor's attempt to have Roman Polanski from Switzerland [1]: it
failed because the Swiss concluded that he had been sentenced and had
served his sentence and so there was no meat in the LA's hamburger.

[1] This occurred during the Great Recession. Given the reduced tax
income of those times, I have been known, from time to time, to wonder
how many rapists and murderers were /not/ prosecuted because the money
needed was spent on their "get Polanski" obsession.
--
"Here lies the Tuscan poet Aretino,
Who evil spoke of everyone but God,
Giving as his excuse, 'I never knew him.'"

[Cryptoengineer]

On 8/18/2024 12:13 PM, Paul S Person wrote:
> On Sat, 17 Aug 2024 11:51:46 +0200, D <***@example.net> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, 16 Aug 2024, Lynn McGuire wrote:
>>
>>> On 8/16/2024 4:55 PM, William Hyde wrote:
>>>> Lynn McGuire wrote:
>>>>> On 8/16/2024 1:26 PM, BCFD 36 wrote:
>>>>>> Awhile back, The Three Body Problem was mentioned. In that thread, there
>>>>>> was no mention of the current Netflix version. Was this mentioned
>>>>>> somewhere else and I just missed it? Google groups is of no help any
>>>>>> more.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I have just started the series and I am intrigued, so far. Just two
>>>>>> episodes. My wife is rather "meh" about it, but she said the same thing
>>>>>> about Star Trek 1 which in reality she HATED so I may be watching it
>>>>>> after she goes to bed.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ----------------
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Dave Scruggs
>>>>>> Senior Software Engineer - Lockheed Martin, et. al (mostly Retired)
>>>>>> Captain - Boulder Creek Fire (Retired)
>>>>>> Board of Directors - Boulder Creek Fire Protection District (What was I
>>>>>> thinking?)
>>>>>
>>>>> I did not like the Netflix version, have yet to read the book.  Too much
>>>>> time spent on the China Cultural Revolution and their violence against the
>>>>> educated.  Felt like a Children of the Corn mini series. I gave up after
>>>>> two episodes.
>>>>
>>>> I've known several people whose lives were damaged by that event.  And
>>>> these were the lucky ones, who made it to the west.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> One scientist I knew never got over it, especially the abuse suffered by
>>>> her mother.  One might have expected her father, an educated man who had
>>>> lived in the West and still had children living there to be as big a
>>>> target. But he was left alone, she said, because he was a renowned
>>>> gerontologist and  the Party leadership was getting older.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Another distinguished scientist told me he reached the last year of
>>>> secondary education only to realize that he'd learned absolutely nothing
>>>> owing to the constant meetings and demonstrations.  Ignoring his teachers,
>>>> he packed four years of school into one.  Judging by his subsequent career,
>>>> he kept up that level of effort for  the next few decades.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> William Hyde
>>>
>>> One of my Dad's mainland Chinese grad students from OU lived with us for a
>>> couple of years from 1973 to 1974 and worked for my Dad from 1973 to 1995.
>>> He came over to the USA in 1966 or 1967 and got a PhD in Chemical Engineering
>>> from OU in 1973. I heard enough stories from him about growing on a farm in
>>> China, living in a cave, starving all the time. If our family did not eat
>>> everything at supper then he would finish everything off. It took my mother
>>> several months break him of that habit. But he never got fat. He never
>>> mentioned anything about the Cultural Revolution but I suspect it was the
>>> reason why he left China.
>>>
>>> He was incredibly smart, he would give me an algorithm and I would code it up
>>> in Fortran 66 for him in a subroutine and give him the card deck. He was very
>>> submissive, he would never look you in the face, would always look down. He
>>> went back to mainland China in 1995 to help with his sister's export
>>> business. Sadly, he soon had a heart attack and passed away. His sister was
>>> kind enough to call my father and tell us.
>>>
>>> I know several people in the USA who had to leave Iran when they had their
>>> cultural revolution. Mostly engineers working for USA companies like Dupont
>>> in Iran. I've gotten a few stories from them, grim, very grim. One of my
>>> classmates at TAMU disappeared at the midyear of our junior year in 1980 when
>>> the Iranian Embassy in the USA sent him a letter cutting off his funds and
>>> ordering him to come home. They also revoked his visa but President Reagan
>>> gave all those people green card status in 1981. He refused to go home to
>>> Iran since he was a nephew of the Shah, he figured that they would shoot him
>>> the minute he stepped off the plane.
>>>
>>> In other words, the various Cultural Revolutions are a little too real for me
>>> and I do not enjoy reading about or viewing them.
>>>
>>> Lynn
>>>
>>
>> With this historical luggage I can never understand how people in europe
>> can insist on voting for socialists. Give them enough power and they tend
>> to repeat themselves. Just look at the socialist UK government now
>> cracking down on free speech. Very sad.
>
> First, the UK has a different view of free speech than the USA.
> /Their/ gummint can prohibit stories from running in newspapers at
> all; ours can not, at least not before they have been published.
>
> Second, they appear to be talking about holding people responsible for
> the consequences of their actions. Starting a riot or crying "Fire!"
> in a theater had /always/ been punishable speech. Just because they
> are doing it online may make it harder to prove (depending on how the
> law is written), but not impossible, and certainly not make it
> unreasonable to try.
>
> I should also point out that their ability to have US citizens
> extradicted will depend on how the relevant treaty is written and the
> relevant process. If this requires the crime charged to be a crime in
> this country, then things may get a bit ... sticky. Consider the LA
> prosecutor's attempt to have Roman Polanski from Switzerland [1]: it
> failed because the Swiss concluded that he had been sentenced and had
> served his sentence and so there was no meat in the LA's hamburger.
>
> [1] This occurred during the Great Recession. Given the reduced tax
> income of those times, I have been known, from time to time, to wonder
> how many rapists and murderers were /not/ prosecuted because the money
> needed was spent on their "get Polanski" obsession.

Extradition would require the act to be a crime in both countries.
Incitement to riot *IS* a crime in the US, but subject to the
'Brandenburg Test' (see link below).

"...the Supreme Court held the speaker must intend to incite or produce
imminent lawless action, and the speaker's words or conduct must be
likely to produce such action."

https://www.criminaldefenselawyer.com/resources/inciting-to-riot-violence-or-insurrection.html

This is, I think, is a much higher bar than the British are using.

"All immigrants should burn" probably doesn't pass the bar.

"Patriots should meet outside the immigrant center on 5th and Main at
10 AM. Bring Molotovs"

probably does.

pt

[D]

On Sun, 18 Aug 2024, Paul S Person wrote:

>> With this historical luggage I can never understand how people in europe
>> can insist on voting for socialists. Give them enough power and they tend
>> to repeat themselves. Just look at the socialist UK government now
>> cracking down on free speech. Very sad.
>
> First, the UK has a different view of free speech than the USA.
> /Their/ gummint can prohibit stories from running in newspapers at
> all; ours can not, at least not before they have been published.

Free speech is free spech. What the UK is doing is moving away from it.
That's a fact. If you define free speech, as "not free spech", yes, I
agree with you that UK (and europe) is all about free speech.

> Second, they appear to be talking about holding people responsible for
> the consequences of their actions. Starting a riot or crying "Fire!"

Actions yes, spreading ideas no. The ones who act on the ideas, yes, the
one who created the ideas, no. It really is that simple, and "fire" is a
bullsh*t argument that should die in todays arguments.

We have all seen the soviet union, cuba, north korea and where abolition
of free speech leads.

> in a theater had /always/ been punishable speech. Just because they
> are doing it online may make it harder to prove (depending on how the
> law is written), but not impossible, and certainly not make it
> unreasonable to try.

If it has been punishable does not mean it should be. Once speaking ill
of god was punishable, but fortunately we now include that under free
speech, except for horrible moslem countries and sweden of course who is
never late to cater to moslem voters.

Also note that I am against free speech on private property, in order to
bring that up. On my property I make the rules. In theory then, since
Twitter is a private company, I have actually no philosophical problems
with them censoring everything. But when it comes to the government, and
the governments actions, free speech is absolute, and going after people
based on their opinions and them voicing their opinions, just makes a
country like the soviet union.

> I should also point out that their ability to have US citizens
> extradicted will depend on how the relevant treaty is written and the
> relevant process. If this requires the crime charged to be a crime in
> this country, then things may get a bit ... sticky. Consider the LA
> prosecutor's attempt to have Roman Polanski from Switzerland [1]: it
> failed because the Swiss concluded that he had been sentenced and had
> served his sentence and so there was no meat in the LA's hamburger.
>
> [1] This occurred during the Great Recession. Given the reduced tax
> income of those times, I have been known, from time to time, to wonder
> how many rapists and murderers were /not/ prosecuted because the money
> needed was spent on their "get Polanski" obsession.
>

[Lee Gleason]

On 8/16/2024 1:26 PM, BCFD 36 wrote:
> Awhile back, The Three Body Problem was mentioned. In that thread, there
> was no mention of the current Netflix version. Was this mentioned
> somewhere else and I just missed it? Google groups is of no help any more.
>
> I have just started the series and I am intrigued, so far. Just two
> episodes. My wife is rather "meh" about it, but she said the same thing
> about Star Trek 1 which in reality she HATED so I may be watching it
> after she goes to bed.
>
> ----------------
>
> Dave Scruggs
> Senior Software Engineer - Lockheed Martin, et. al (mostly Retired)
> Captain - Boulder Creek Fire (Retired)
> Board of Directors - Boulder Creek Fire Protection District (What was I
> thinking?)


Watched 20 minutes, found it very boring. Not what I look for in SF.

--
Lee K. Gleason N5ZMR
Control-G Consultants
***@comcast.net

[Cryptoengineer]

On 8/16/2024 2:26 PM, BCFD 36 wrote:
> Awhile back, The Three Body Problem was mentioned. In that thread, there
> was no mention of the current Netflix version. Was this mentioned
> somewhere else and I just missed it? Google groups is of no help any more.
>
> I have just started the series and I am intrigued, so far. Just two
> episodes. My wife is rather "meh" about it, but she said the same thing
> about Star Trek 1 which in reality she HATED so I may be watching it
> after she goes to bed.

Its been mentioned several times.

There's also a Chinese version, on Youtube.

pt

[Bice]

On Fri, 16 Aug 2024 11:26:20 -0700, BCFD 36 <***@cruzio.com> wrote:

>Awhile back, The Three Body Problem was mentioned. In that thread, there
>was no mention of the current Netflix version. Was this mentioned
>somewhere else and I just missed it? Google groups is of no help any more.
>
>I have just started the series and I am intrigued, so far. Just two
>episodes.

Since this thread immediately went wildly off topic, I'll just chime
in to say that I read the three books and greatly enjoyed them
(although the middle one was a bit of a slog - I'm wondering if it was
because it had a different translator).

So when the Netflix series came out, I watched it and liked it even
though they changed a few things from the books. Most noticable is
that all the main characters on the show are from the same small group
of friends, which seems pretty unlikely and wasn't the case in the
books.

Anyway, I liked the TV series enough to watch it a second time. It's
mostly based on the first book, although there are bits and pieces of
the latter two books in there. They've gotten the green light to
create additional season(s) to cover all three books. I'm looking
forward to it, especially seeing how they depict the end of the third
book, which seems pretty unfilmable to me.


>My wife is rather "meh" about it, but she said the same thing
>about Star Trek 1 which in reality she HATED so I may be watching it
>after she goes to bed.

Heh. My wife complained about my second viewing and claimed she
didn't like the show, but I noticed that she got pretty invested in
it. Enough so that when Benedict Wong turned up in something else we
were watching, she said "Hey, that's the guy who was in Three Body
Problem. I hate that I know that."

-- Bob