Maker Pro
Maker Pro

Re: History of bulk electronic components suppliers

H

Homer J Simpson

The word "liberal" used to mean "in favor of Liberty", but it's come to
mean "socialist" these days. >:-[

Nope. It means progressive.

Tell me, sincerely: as a progressive, presumably in favor of sharing
the benefits of the planet with everyone, are you willing to sacrifice
any of your own personal well-being to, say, help miserably poor and
sick people in less developed places? Or is your progressivism of the
theoretical "tax somebody else to help them, I can't afford it" sort?

No. It's of the "Stop pissing away my tax money on crap that doesn't work"
variety.
I know a lot of theoretical progressives who are nasty, selfish, angry
jerks. They don't give squat about actual poor people, they just want
to crush people who are richer than themselves.

So they don't want to dump non working crap? They'd rather scrap good
programs?

"Bush to scrap poor elderly's food program:
WASHINGTON--The boxes arrive every month at churches, senior citizen centers
and other sites for distribution to nearly a half-million poor elderly
people. Each is stocked with a mix of nutritious foods such as cereal,
peanut butter, fruit, vegetables and pasta. Sometimes volunteers deliver
them right to people's homes.
Now. President Bush wants to eliminate the program, one of 141 federal
initiatives that his proposed new budget would scrap or cut dramatically."

What was it again? Compassionate Conservative? He'd rather support DARE,
which doesn't work at all, abstinence only programs, which lead to more
STDs, faith based programs, as long as they are the 'right' faith - but
which still don't work?

Yeah, they really want to save the taxpayer's money.
 
J

John Larkin

The word "liberal" used to mean "in favor of Liberty", but it's come to
mean "socialist" these days. >:-[

Nope. It means progressive.

Tell me, sincerely: as a progressive, presumably in favor of sharing
the benefits of the planet with everyone, are you willing to sacrifice
any of your own personal well-being to, say, help miserably poor and
sick people in less developed places? Or is your progressivism of the
theoretical "tax somebody else to help them, I can't afford it" sort?

No. It's of the "Stop pissing away my tax money on crap that doesn't work"
variety.
I know a lot of theoretical progressives who are nasty, selfish, angry
jerks. They don't give squat about actual poor people, they just want
to crush people who are richer than themselves.

So they don't want to dump non working crap? They'd rather scrap good
programs?

"Bush to scrap poor elderly's food program:
WASHINGTON--The boxes arrive every month at churches, senior citizen centers
and other sites for distribution to nearly a half-million poor elderly
people. Each is stocked with a mix of nutritious foods such as cereal,
peanut butter, fruit, vegetables and pasta. Sometimes volunteers deliver
them right to people's homes.
Now. President Bush wants to eliminate the program, one of 141 federal
initiatives that his proposed new budget would scrap or cut dramatically."

What was it again? Compassionate Conservative? He'd rather support DARE,
which doesn't work at all, abstinence only programs, which lead to more
STDs, faith based programs, as long as they are the 'right' faith - but
which still don't work?

Yeah, they really want to save the taxpayer's money.


I see. Angry theorist. That's sad.

John
 
J

James Arthur

Nah. It's about money. The right-wing were born with silver spoons in
their mouth, and the left-wing are condemned to survive on crumbs from
the rich man's plate, or make a pittance scrubbing his toilets.

That's incorrect Rich. I've seen the stats. Far and away,
Americans with money have earned it themselves. Only a small fraction
inherit it.

My bro used to prepare hundreds of tax returns -- on the same
income, wealthier people saved, and the vast majority of people
without money (assets) were exactly the ones who spent the most of it.

What about you Rich? AIUI, you were born Rich, weren't you? ;-)

Best,
James Arthur
 
J

John Larkin


The book I've been reading, "Who Really Cares." Extensively researched
and footnoted. Read it: it's a revelation.
I suggest you try being poor.

As Joe DiMaggio (I think) said, I been rich and I been poor. Rich is
better.

Are you willing to give up any of your personal comforts to help the
truly poor and sick and miserable of the world, or are you another of
the "Progressive" theorists like Homer who are angry at rich people
but actually don't give a damn about poor ones?

John
 
J

James Arthur

The only problem with this proposition is that it is bullshit.

No, that's what it's become. Socialism, redistribution of wealth,
charity; call it what you will. It's the belief that others must
labor on your behalf, and pay your maintenance.

Some of that might make sense--I believe there is such a thing as
social investment. Once upon a time I would've cited public schools
as an example, except that they've become such a dismal example, one
of political correctness and great expense, but very poor results.
What liberals
want is fair treatment for all. What the reactionaries want is preference
for some - themselves.

"Fair" means "treating everyone equally," which "Liberals" certainly
do _not_ want. Why, as it is, one third of Americans pay essentially
all of the taxes, yet this is somehow construed to be not enough, that
this is "unfair" in favor of the taxpayers rather than the tax-takers.

No, "fair" is just a code word for wanting unearned another man's
goods, fairly earned.

Best,
James Arthur
 
H

Homer J Simpson

No, that's what it's become. Socialism, redistribution of wealth,
charity; call it what you will. It's the belief that others must
labor on your behalf, and pay your maintenance.

Stop telling me what I believe. I believe that crooks like Enron,
Halliburton and the like are way worse than anyone else. Some have suggested
that they steal 2 or 3 times as much as street criminals.

Why are you blind to this:

http://abcnews.go.com/2020/story?id=2874922&page=1

"So it's not surprising that the sales of Provigil - the first prescription
drug to treat excessive sleepiness - are exploding.
The drug brought in $800 million last year. Financial analyst Eric Schmidt
of Cowen and Co. says, at least for Wall Street, this so-called "awake pill"
is a dream, because the market of sleepy people is enormous."
....

"Wesensten compared Provigil to caffeine in terms of how well the soldiers
performed on tests and how alert they were, and she also looked at side
effects. The result?
"In our hands, at the dosages we tested, modafinil did not work any better
than caffeine," she said."

So Cephalon are making a billion dollars out of a pill that works no better
and perhaps worse than coffee? And it's fucking LIBERALS you are whining
about? When was the last time liberals screwed the public out of a billion
dollars for nothing? Jesus you are an idiot.
 
J

Jim Thompson

The word "liberal" used to mean "in favor of Liberty", but it's come to
mean "socialist" these days. >:-[

Nope. It means progressive.

Tell me, sincerely: as a progressive, presumably in favor of sharing
the benefits of the planet with everyone, are you willing to sacrifice
any of your own personal well-being to, say, help miserably poor and
sick people in less developed places? Or is your progressivism of the
theoretical "tax somebody else to help them, I can't afford it" sort?

No. It's of the "Stop pissing away my tax money on crap that doesn't work"
variety.
I know a lot of theoretical progressives who are nasty, selfish, angry
jerks. They don't give squat about actual poor people, they just want
to crush people who are richer than themselves.

So they don't want to dump non working crap? They'd rather scrap good
programs?

"Bush to scrap poor elderly's food program:
WASHINGTON--The boxes arrive every month at churches, senior citizen centers
and other sites for distribution to nearly a half-million poor elderly
people. Each is stocked with a mix of nutritious foods such as cereal,
peanut butter, fruit, vegetables and pasta. Sometimes volunteers deliver
them right to people's homes.
Now. President Bush wants to eliminate the program, one of 141 federal
initiatives that his proposed new budget would scrap or cut dramatically."

What was it again? Compassionate Conservative? He'd rather support DARE,
which doesn't work at all, abstinence only programs, which lead to more
STDs, faith based programs, as long as they are the 'right' faith - but
which still don't work?

Yeah, they really want to save the taxpayer's money.


I see. Angry theorist. That's sad.

John

"Theorist"? No. Fundamental ignoramus? Yes.

It was a redundant program that was eliminated. It is more efficient
to deliver food IN BULK to charities, who break it up into
boxes/whatever, and distribute, rather than having an inefficient
government agency do the boxing. Plus there's little expense with an
all volunteer organization.

For example The Saint Mary's/West Side Food Bank Alliance distributes
around 230,000 meals daily here in Phoenix.

(My favorite charity ;-)

...Jim Thompson
 
J

John Larkin

Stop telling me what I believe. I believe that crooks like Enron,
Halliburton and the like are way worse than anyone else. Some have suggested
that they steal 2 or 3 times as much as street criminals.

Enron sells us petajoules of fuel and makes a few per cent profit in
the process, most of which is re-invested, and you consider that to be
stealing? No wonder you're a cartoon character.
Why are you blind to this:

http://abcnews.go.com/2020/story?id=2874922&page=1

"So it's not surprising that the sales of Provigil - the first prescription
drug to treat excessive sleepiness - are exploding.
The drug brought in $800 million last year. Financial analyst Eric Schmidt
of Cowen and Co. says, at least for Wall Street, this so-called "awake pill"
is a dream, because the market of sleepy people is enormous."
...

"Wesensten compared Provigil to caffeine in terms of how well the soldiers
performed on tests and how alert they were, and she also looked at side
effects. The result?
"In our hands, at the dosages we tested, modafinil did not work any better
than caffeine," she said."

So Cephalon are making a billion dollars out of a pill that works no better
and perhaps worse than coffee? And it's fucking LIBERALS you are whining
about? When was the last time liberals screwed the public out of a billion
dollars for nothing? Jesus you are an idiot.

If you don't like the drug, don't buy it, same as diamonds or
surfboards or beer. Everybody gets that choice. What are you,
anti-choice?

John
 
J

John Larkin

Better than a deluded nutjob like you - all theory and no facts.

I have lots of facts. You just don't like tham.


OK, let's dump the theory and get real: for every dollar you
verifiably donate to

http://www.doctorswithoutborders.org/

I will donate four. I'll even put up four US dollars against one
Canadian. Let's limit it, say, to $15,000 on my part. After all, I
have a lot of other good causes on my donation list for this year.

What do you say?

John
 
J

James Arthur

Stop telling me what I believe. I believe that crooks like Enron,
Halliburton and the like are way worse than anyone else. Some have suggested
that they steal 2 or 3 times as much as street criminals.

Why are you blind to this:

http://abcnews.go.com/2020/story?id=2874922&page=1

"So it's not surprising that the sales of Provigil - the first prescription
drug to treat excessive sleepiness - are exploding.
The drug brought in $800 million last year. Financial analyst Eric Schmidt
of Cowen and Co. says, at least for Wall Street, this so-called "awake pill"
is a dream, because the market of sleepy people is enormous."
...

"Wesensten compared Provigil to caffeine in terms of how well the soldiers
performed on tests and how alert they were, and she also looked at side
effects. The result?
"In our hands, at the dosages we tested, modafinil did not work any better
than caffeine," she said."

So Cephalon are making a billion dollars out of a pill that works no better
and perhaps worse than coffee? And it's fucking LIBERALS you are whining
about?

And how much did people spend buying Nintendo Wii's?

Sure, it's a silly, expensive pill for most people, and silly people
will waste their money to buy it. In a few years here, these silly
people will complain about the expense of it, and demand that other
people buy those silly pills for them, to cover the expense. And they
will.

At least for the time being I don't have to buy it for them.
When was the last time liberals screwed the public out of a billion
dollars for nothing?

_All the time_, and trillions, not billions. Clearly you don't
understand the magnitude of things.

Social Security, for example, takes 13% of my income toward my
retirement, an amount which, if I were allowed to keep, would fund my
retirement in 8 years. Social Security, however, does not save and
invest that money, as I would, but instead immediately pays it out to
other people I don't know, whom I've never met. And then the money is
gone.

(That math works for everyone, not just me, because everyone pays
the same 13% rate. Anyone who can save 10 years' expenses, and invest
at 10% (~12% is the long-term stock market average), can live off the
interest. Anything more you can save is gravy.)

Medicare's prescription benefit will cost even more. And even those
sky-high costs will soar--creating an entitlement to pricey drugs
gives companies and customers a license to make and sell super-
expensive drugs, without regard to cost or benefit.

More than half of California's $130 billion dollar budget goes to
schools with stats that are so shockingly poor they condemn a much of
generation to ignorance, illiteracy, poverty, and crime. What's the
cost of that?

And even though they get enough money to feed, clothe, house, AND
educate each student, yet provide merely 6 hours of babysitting and 2
square frankenfood meals for it, the cry is always that the money
isn't enough. More money will make it better, they say.

These are just a few examples. Try adding up the amount the U.S.
has spent on fighting poverty since 1960 with well-intentioned
entitlements, and compare this to the national debt. It's stunning.
Jesus you are an idiot.

Am I?

Best,
James Arthur
 
H

Homer J Simpson

Enron sells us petajoules of fuel and makes a few per cent profit in
the process, most of which is re-invested, and you consider that to be
stealing? No wonder you're a cartoon character.

Enron not Exxon. At least I don't THINK like a cartoon character.
If you don't like the drug, don't buy it, same as diamonds or
surfboards or beer. Everybody gets that choice. What are you,
anti-choice?

Anti-conman. How legitimate is it for a corporation to corrupt the medical
system to make money out of stupidity? It's not as if they are honest about
their magic pills.


--
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
 
H

Homer J Simpson

These are just a few examples. Try adding up the amount the U.S.
has spent on fighting poverty since 1960 with well-intentioned
entitlements, and compare this to the national debt. It's stunning.

Compare it to how much the US has spent on pointless or losing wars.


--
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
 
J

John Larkin

Enron not Exxon. At least I don't THINK like a cartoon character.

Oops, missed that one. Enron, not performing net beneficial services
to society, died. So the system works.
Anti-conman. How legitimate is it for a corporation to corrupt the medical
system to make money out of stupidity? It's not as if they are honest about
their magic pills.

You must do a lot of research to find so many things to be unhappy and
angry about.

John
 
J

James Arthur

Compare it to how much the US has spent on pointless or losing wars.

It's only a tiny fraction. Literally. Again, you don't understand
the magnitudes.

Best,
James
 
H

Homer J Simpson

Oops, missed that one. Enron, not performing net beneficial services
to society, died. So the system works.

Tell that to the employees, investors, and luckless customers.
You must do a lot of research to find so many things to be unhappy and
angry about.

Waking up and opening your eyes is research?


--
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
 
H

Homer J Simpson

It's only a tiny fraction. Literally. Again, you don't understand
the magnitudes.

$2 trillion for the latest Iraq debacle alone?


--
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
 
J

James Arthur

Compare it to how much the US has spent on pointless or losing wars.

Though small, you make a good point--how much do you think it'll
cost us in lives and treasure to have had the war effort sabotaged &
scuttled?

Best,
James Arthur
 
J

John Larkin

List all of the liberals running Halliburton.

Republicans fall into two camps. Those who are rich and want to keep it all.

Those who aren't rich and think being a Republican will help.

Which group is larger? Which is more generous?

The largest group of Republicans are of course not rich. This
infuriates Democratic politicians who don't understand why low-income
people would elect to be either conservative or Republican, "against
their own self-interest". A book was written on the subject, "What's
Wrong With Kansas?" Most libs wind up concluding that the lower
middle-class (their avowed constituancy!) are just stupid yokels who
deserve being poor. What they miss is that anyone would ever be
motivated by anything other than immediate greed; the very concept is
incomprehensable to them.

Of course, in relative or even in absolute terms, conservatives and
especially Christian conservatives are far more generous (of money,
time, kindness, and blood) than liberals, and immensely more generous
than secular liberals. This is good, since kids tend to follow their
parents' beliefs here, and the conservatives are having a lot more
babies.

Which is why, although I am not a believer, I have great respect for
people who are.

How much do you donate to charity? Do you volunteer? Give blood?

How many kids do you have?

Oh, you never told us: how much do you weigh?


John
 
Top