I get what you're saying and I agree, but have a little more faith. I get most texts from them in regular English.
![]() |
When faced with the public good question its almost impossible to find a definition that is universal when applied. There are extreme examples like China and its limits on children to movies that portray a future that we may face like soylent green. If the "public good" is about the bottom dollar then we have nowhere to turn but the accountants. Add to the mix the compassion of the public and the lines move all over the place. The bottom line is freedom is rarely free. But when we leave the nest we don't need governmental parents hovering over us for the rest of our lives either.
Side note: The virus that Im speaking of in previous post was the aides virus. And at the time when it first appeared there was discussion of quarantine of the persons infected. As horrible as it sounds we now bare the costs for our decisions.
2004 Report on the global AIDS epidemic - 4th global report - Financing the response to AIDS
HI again Tom,
In an ideal world maybe, but economic rationalism is just that. A rationalist argument
Australia went down that part in the 70's it has long since been rejected or modified. We realized that like most rationalist positions we can't pull ourselves up by out own boot straps. We also took into consideration the social costs.
Any idea of good will of others doesn't apply when it comes to a significant portion of the Australian population. Again, were are still largely an egalitarian society.
Regards
Tut
Hi speech,
Yes, it is a myth, but it is no less a myth than economic rationalism. If you are saying that a myth is something than has no basis in experience then, yes> both can be regarded as a myth. In your country you can strive for unobtainable economic rationalism. In Australia we strive for unobtainable equity. I know which one I'd rather aim for.
Regards
Tut
Hello again, Steve:
I'm having trouble with your hypocrisy... It's OK with you to ban marijuana, apparently for the public good, but you don't want to ban crap food from your children - I guess because you either don't see the danger in crap food for kids, or you want to make that decision for yourself...
But, you're happy with the nanny state telling you that you can't smoke pot?? I'm sorry. I don't get it... Maybe that's because I CHOSE to smoke a big joint before I posted this. But, my being stoned isn't what's causing my confusion... It's really your hypocrisy... I'd like to call it something else, Steve, because I know you'll be offended having been called a hypocrite... But, there's NO other word for it...
excon
Thank you for the education on texting. :rolleyes:
There is no "whole point" of texting other than to send someone a message. Since phones now have keyboards it's not the pain in the a$$ it used to be to type a message. I said what I meant before and I meant what I said, them's the facts.
It used to be but with predictive text technologies that most modern come equipped with much of the abbreviations have vanished.
Here's an example of a similar phone to mine:
YouTube - HTC Desire Predictive Text
The person typing was actually literate and knew the difference between "it's" and "its" and between "then" and "than" and actually used punctuation. It was like his third grade teacher was looking over his shoulder and helping him press buttons. Most people use cell phones, and not fancy equipment that cost a lot. I'm not impressed.
Well my HTC Magic cost me $79 and it opened us up to geocaching so it's money well spent for us. The old texting with numeric keypads is quickly going away.
You're a sweetee. :)
All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:26 AM. |