Trade Promotion Authority May make H-1B Irrelevant, NAFTA Obsolete
Jun 2nd 2001, 8:06 pm
#61
Guest
Posts: n/a
Tom Lehman wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
Oh please... when did the government or any of its agencies come up with anything
new? Inventions and discoveries are in general made in private companies who spend
MUCH more money on such research than the government does. Why? Because when they
come up with something new, they can use it to make money. Why, because you are
willing to pay for that device/medication/invention. Why are you willing to pay for
it, because it will make your life better.
The vast majority of discoveries are made in companies today, and they capitlize on
it. If it hadn't been for the fact that they can, we wouldn't have those inventions.
--
+------------------------+-------------------------------------------+
>
[usenetquote2]| | Living it, loving it | http://ingrid.bivrost.com/ |[/usenetquote2]
>
>
>
>
>
Oh please... when did the government or any of its agencies come up with anything
new? Inventions and discoveries are in general made in private companies who spend
MUCH more money on such research than the government does. Why? Because when they
come up with something new, they can use it to make money. Why, because you are
willing to pay for that device/medication/invention. Why are you willing to pay for
it, because it will make your life better.
The vast majority of discoveries are made in companies today, and they capitlize on
it. If it hadn't been for the fact that they can, we wouldn't have those inventions.
--
+------------------------+-------------------------------------------+
>
[usenetquote2]| | Living it, loving it | http://ingrid.bivrost.com/ |[/usenetquote2]
Jun 2nd 2001, 8:40 pm
#62
Guest
Posts: n/a
Those numbers come from the same source as your layoff numbers.
"Kev" <[email protected]>
[usenetquote2]> >> >> >> Your question is mostly irrelevant because this open border[/usenetquote2]
scenario
[usenetquote2]> >> >won't[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> >> >> take into consideration exchange rates, work conditions, quality[/usenetquote2]
of
[usenetquote2]> >> >life[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> >> >> etc. etc. It's very obvious that an Indian would be perfectly[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >willing[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> >to[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> >> >> work in the US for a fraction of what a middle class worker[/usenetquote2]
expects
[usenetquote2]> >to[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> >> >> make - that is the only thing that is important here.[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> >> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> >> >Why is that perfectly obvious? If he did he would have to be remarkably[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> >> >stupid. If, for example, he works in San Jose, and will need to pay for a[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> >> >place to stay, say he gets it cheap at $1700/month. Why would he ba[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> >> >satisfied with say $40.000/year?[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> >> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> >> >A little shopping around, and he would find that he could double that if he[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> >> >has some experience? Why would he settle for a fraction of what a middle[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> >> >class worker expects to get?[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> >> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> >> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> >> >--[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> >>[/usenetquote2]
>
[usenetquote2]> >> >> >| Terje A. Bergesen | [email protected][/usenetquote2]
>
[usenetquote2]> >> >> >| Santa Monica, CA | http://terje.bivrost.com/[/usenetquote2]
>
[usenetquote2]> >> >> >| Living it, loving it | http://ingrid.bivrost.com/[/usenetquote2]
>
[usenetquote2]> >> >>[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> >>[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >>[/usenetquote2]
>
"Kev" <[email protected]>
[usenetquote2]> >> >> >> Your question is mostly irrelevant because this open border[/usenetquote2]
scenario
[usenetquote2]> >> >won't[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> >> >> take into consideration exchange rates, work conditions, quality[/usenetquote2]
of
[usenetquote2]> >> >life[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> >> >> etc. etc. It's very obvious that an Indian would be perfectly[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >willing[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> >to[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> >> >> work in the US for a fraction of what a middle class worker[/usenetquote2]
expects
[usenetquote2]> >to[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> >> >> make - that is the only thing that is important here.[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> >> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> >> >Why is that perfectly obvious? If he did he would have to be remarkably[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> >> >stupid. If, for example, he works in San Jose, and will need to pay for a[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> >> >place to stay, say he gets it cheap at $1700/month. Why would he ba[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> >> >satisfied with say $40.000/year?[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> >> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> >> >A little shopping around, and he would find that he could double that if he[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> >> >has some experience? Why would he settle for a fraction of what a middle[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> >> >class worker expects to get?[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> >> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> >> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> >> >--[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> >>[/usenetquote2]
>
[usenetquote2]> >> >> >| Terje A. Bergesen | [email protected][/usenetquote2]
>
[usenetquote2]> >> >> >| Santa Monica, CA | http://terje.bivrost.com/[/usenetquote2]
>
[usenetquote2]> >> >> >| Living it, loving it | http://ingrid.bivrost.com/[/usenetquote2]
>
[usenetquote2]> >> >>[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> >>[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >>[/usenetquote2]
>
Jun 2nd 2001, 8:40 pm
#63
Guest
Posts: n/a
"Kev" <[email protected]>
[usenetquote2]> >> >> >> Your question is mostly irrelevant because this open border[/usenetquote2]
scenario
[usenetquote2]> >> >won't[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> >> >> take into consideration exchange rates, work conditions, quality[/usenetquote2]
of
[usenetquote2]> >> >life[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> >> >> etc. etc. It's very obvious that an Indian would be perfectly[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >willing[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> >to[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> >> >> work in the US for a fraction of what a middle class worker[/usenetquote2]
expects
[usenetquote2]> >to[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> >> >> make - that is the only thing that is important here.[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> >> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> >> >Why is that perfectly obvious? If he did he would have to be remarkably[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> >> >stupid. If, for example, he works in San Jose, and will need to pay for a[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> >> >place to stay, say he gets it cheap at $1700/month. Why would he ba[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> >> >satisfied with say $40.000/year?[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> >> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> >> >A little shopping around, and he would find that he could double that if he[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> >> >has some experience? Why would he settle for a fraction of what a middle[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> >> >class worker expects to get?[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> >> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> >> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> >> >--[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> >>[/usenetquote2]
>
[usenetquote2]> >> >> >| Terje A. Bergesen | [email protected][/usenetquote2]
>
[usenetquote2]> >> >> >| Santa Monica, CA | http://terje.bivrost.com/[/usenetquote2]
>
[usenetquote2]> >> >> >| Living it, loving it | http://ingrid.bivrost.com/[/usenetquote2]
>
[usenetquote2]> >> >>[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> >>[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >>[/usenetquote2]
>
[usenetquote2]> >> >> >> Your question is mostly irrelevant because this open border[/usenetquote2]
scenario
[usenetquote2]> >> >won't[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> >> >> take into consideration exchange rates, work conditions, quality[/usenetquote2]
of
[usenetquote2]> >> >life[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> >> >> etc. etc. It's very obvious that an Indian would be perfectly[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >willing[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> >to[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> >> >> work in the US for a fraction of what a middle class worker[/usenetquote2]
expects
[usenetquote2]> >to[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> >> >> make - that is the only thing that is important here.[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> >> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> >> >Why is that perfectly obvious? If he did he would have to be remarkably[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> >> >stupid. If, for example, he works in San Jose, and will need to pay for a[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> >> >place to stay, say he gets it cheap at $1700/month. Why would he ba[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> >> >satisfied with say $40.000/year?[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> >> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> >> >A little shopping around, and he would find that he could double that if he[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> >> >has some experience? Why would he settle for a fraction of what a middle[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> >> >class worker expects to get?[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> >> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> >> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> >> >--[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> >>[/usenetquote2]
>
[usenetquote2]> >> >> >| Terje A. Bergesen | [email protected][/usenetquote2]
>
[usenetquote2]> >> >> >| Santa Monica, CA | http://terje.bivrost.com/[/usenetquote2]
>
[usenetquote2]> >> >> >| Living it, loving it | http://ingrid.bivrost.com/[/usenetquote2]
>
[usenetquote2]> >> >>[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> >>[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >>[/usenetquote2]
>
Jun 2nd 2001, 8:47 pm
#64
Guest
Posts: n/a
Terje A. Bergesen wrote:
>
>
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > Jacobson--Yeah. Paid for by the public through the National Institute of Health,[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > the military, or other government/public funded research and development. Then[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > capitalized on by the corporations and sold back to the public who paid for it in[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > the first place.[/usenetquote2]
>
>
>
All the time. Try reading some research journals some day. Look at the affiliations
of the authors and look at the sources of funding which are usually acknowledged
somewhere in the articles.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
You clearly do not know what you are talking about. Please quit cross-posting to
sci.research.careers so you don't look like such a fool by making statements such as
those above to people who do this work for a living and know that you are wrong.
Regards, Russell
>
>
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > Jacobson--Yeah. Paid for by the public through the National Institute of Health,[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > the military, or other government/public funded research and development. Then[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > capitalized on by the corporations and sold back to the public who paid for it in[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > the first place.[/usenetquote2]
>
>
>
All the time. Try reading some research journals some day. Look at the affiliations
of the authors and look at the sources of funding which are usually acknowledged
somewhere in the articles.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
You clearly do not know what you are talking about. Please quit cross-posting to
sci.research.careers so you don't look like such a fool by making statements such as
those above to people who do this work for a living and know that you are wrong.
Regards, Russell
Jun 2nd 2001, 8:51 pm
#65
Guest
Posts: n/a
[usenetquote2]>>[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]>> Are you going to sit there and say you honestly believe those number? The US has[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]>> just had one of the biggest layoffs in history and you think that the 4.4 number[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]>> are actually true! The gov is lying and everyone knows it. Please JJ don't[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]>> embarrass yourself like this.[/usenetquote2]
>
>
>
>
>
>
[usenetquote2]>> Are you going to sit there and say you honestly believe those number? The US has[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]>> just had one of the biggest layoffs in history and you think that the 4.4 number[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]>> are actually true! The gov is lying and everyone knows it. Please JJ don't[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]>> embarrass yourself like this.[/usenetquote2]
>
>
>
>
>
>
Jun 2nd 2001, 8:54 pm
#66
Guest
Posts: n/a
Dan NEVER posts anything of content. All his posts are the same kindergarten
swearing and banal bantering one comesto expect from a spoiled brat that resulted
from absentee parents. I am hereby adding Dan to my killfile and I advise others to
do the same.
>
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > Terje, you are a ****face. Please stop defending yourself-- you will find no[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > sympathy here asshole.[/usenetquote2]
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
swearing and banal bantering one comesto expect from a spoiled brat that resulted
from absentee parents. I am hereby adding Dan to my killfile and I advise others to
do the same.
>
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > Terje, you are a ****face. Please stop defending yourself-- you will find no[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > sympathy here asshole.[/usenetquote2]
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Jun 2nd 2001, 8:54 pm
#67
Guest
Posts: n/a
PLONK.
"Dan" <[email protected]>
[usenetquote2]> >> > Do you have the ability to talk without starting a sentence with an insult? Is[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> > the world so hard from behind your white hood?[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >>[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> I would like to know Indian's version of the KKK because that's obviously what[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> you belong to.[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >Why? Because I reply to someone who calls me a ****face, and worse? Not once have[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >I starded with an insult, I have ONLY replied in the same (in actuality, far[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >nicer) language. I use arguments, and I am ONLY met with insult. How can I assume[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >that such people have more than about 5 braincells?[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> > You apparently have no clue whatsoever about H1B. Why would an H1B person not[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> > have the luxury of shopping around? It is trivial to transfer an H1 from one[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> > company to another, today that process is even easier, since you are now[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> > allowed to start working for the second company while the transfer is being[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> > processed.[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >>[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> That's a lie and you would know that if you knew the first thing about H-1B.[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >That is a statement, not backed up by a single argument. It is also completely[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >wrong. If you have an H1B, and you want to work for another company, if that[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >company is willing to sponsor an H1B, and most tech companies are, you can change[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >job easily. It used to take 2-4 weeks in California, now you can change the day[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >they file for an H1 transfer. NO PROBLEM![/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> > My question to you then is, if I am a clueless ****face, and I know A LOT more[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> > about H1s than you do, what does that make you?[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >>[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> What an ass ****ing low life you are to accuse Kev of being a KKK member.[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >ONLY because he calls me a ****face and lots of other stuff in each and every[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >posting. I have ONLY answered back with insult, not once started out with it. Am I[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >not allowed to answer someone that has no arguments whatsoever, but only insult?[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> After what you said here, I have to conclude that Kev is a very good judge of[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> character and he figured you out completely.[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >How did he figure me out? By calling me a ****face from the first posting he did?[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >Hardly.[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >--[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >+------------------------+-------------------------------------------+[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >| Terje A. Bergesen | [email protected] | Santa Monica, CA |[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >| http://terje.bivrost.com/ | Living it, loving it | http://ingrid.bivrost.com/ |[/usenetquote2]
"Dan" <[email protected]>
[usenetquote2]> >> > Do you have the ability to talk without starting a sentence with an insult? Is[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> > the world so hard from behind your white hood?[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >>[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> I would like to know Indian's version of the KKK because that's obviously what[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> you belong to.[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >Why? Because I reply to someone who calls me a ****face, and worse? Not once have[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >I starded with an insult, I have ONLY replied in the same (in actuality, far[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >nicer) language. I use arguments, and I am ONLY met with insult. How can I assume[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >that such people have more than about 5 braincells?[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> > You apparently have no clue whatsoever about H1B. Why would an H1B person not[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> > have the luxury of shopping around? It is trivial to transfer an H1 from one[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> > company to another, today that process is even easier, since you are now[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> > allowed to start working for the second company while the transfer is being[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> > processed.[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >>[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> That's a lie and you would know that if you knew the first thing about H-1B.[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >That is a statement, not backed up by a single argument. It is also completely[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >wrong. If you have an H1B, and you want to work for another company, if that[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >company is willing to sponsor an H1B, and most tech companies are, you can change[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >job easily. It used to take 2-4 weeks in California, now you can change the day[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >they file for an H1 transfer. NO PROBLEM![/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> > My question to you then is, if I am a clueless ****face, and I know A LOT more[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> > about H1s than you do, what does that make you?[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >>[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> What an ass ****ing low life you are to accuse Kev of being a KKK member.[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >ONLY because he calls me a ****face and lots of other stuff in each and every[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >posting. I have ONLY answered back with insult, not once started out with it. Am I[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >not allowed to answer someone that has no arguments whatsoever, but only insult?[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> After what you said here, I have to conclude that Kev is a very good judge of[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> character and he figured you out completely.[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >How did he figure me out? By calling me a ****face from the first posting he did?[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >Hardly.[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >--[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >+------------------------+-------------------------------------------+[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >| Terje A. Bergesen | [email protected] | Santa Monica, CA |[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >| http://terje.bivrost.com/ | Living it, loving it | http://ingrid.bivrost.com/ |[/usenetquote2]
Jun 2nd 2001, 8:56 pm
#68
Guest
Posts: n/a
As always, you are exactly right, but what I was referring to was the fact that now
you can start at the new employer right away, before your old employer has any chance
to discover what you are up to and fire you.
>
>
>
[usenetquote2]> > No, it is not a lie. It is the truth. It just happens to contradict your[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > prejudices to the contrary, so you dismiss it as a "lie" when you know it is[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > the truth and has been the truth since October. You anti-H-1Bers are such a[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > bunch of transparent lying losers it is just hilarious.[/usenetquote2]
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
you can start at the new employer right away, before your old employer has any chance
to discover what you are up to and fire you.
>
>
>
[usenetquote2]> > No, it is not a lie. It is the truth. It just happens to contradict your[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > prejudices to the contrary, so you dismiss it as a "lie" when you know it is[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > the truth and has been the truth since October. You anti-H-1Bers are such a[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > bunch of transparent lying losers it is just hilarious.[/usenetquote2]
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Jun 2nd 2001, 8:58 pm
#69
Guest
Posts: n/a
John Jacobson wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Actually it was scientists in pursuit of knowledge for its own sake who made the
fundamental discoveries that led to most of these developments. Without such work
industry would often not know where to start looking for the next new treatment.
Sometimes this fundamental research is funded by private companies. Often it isn't.
In recent years that has been increasingly less the case that it is.
Your child-like naivete (or maybe it's just ignorance) is simply stunning if you or
Terje believe that there is a one-to-one, cause and effect relationship between free
enterprize and the examples you've both given. Maybe you've both been reading too
much libertarian "economics" without engaging your critical faculties.
>
[usenetquote2]> > Margaret Bartley wrote:[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > ...[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > > http://www.globalexchange.org/ftaa/statement040201.html[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > > This is a complete capitulation to corporate greedsters.[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > Who are these corporate greedsters? What do they do? How is the world fairing[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > under their tyranny?[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > They are us, you and I. We have our 401K money placed squarely in their corner.[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > Our jobs depend on them being as greedy as they can possibly be.[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > They create jobs, some in the US, who has the lowest unemployment in a very long[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > time. They create products, ever cheaper such, so that we can now buy "stuff" for[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > a fraction of what it cost in our parents time.[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > How is the world doing under this tyranny? Well, this corporate globalism has had[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > its strongest growth since the early '80, and onwards. In 1980 40.000 people died[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > of starvation every day. In those days there was somewhere around 4B people in[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > the world. In 1999 20.000 people died every day of starvation, a SUBSTANTIAL[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > reduction. Most of this reduction comes from increased global trade, hardly any[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > from aid programs, and some, but extremely little, from population movement. You[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > need to solve the problems where they are.[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > What wrong did these corporate greedsters do so that the number of people[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > starving to death has been halved while the worlds population has increased by[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > almost 50%? Where is their crime?[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > In the same time, the difference between rich and poor in the US has increased.[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > This is a problem, and it is a problem that should be solved. Domestic poverty is[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > something the US should not have to deal with. There will always be transition[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > periods, but the current situation is too bad. It can be solved by finding ways[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > to create jobs in areas where jobs are dissapearing, but one must also realize[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > that some movement of people will be needed, all areas are not meant to be[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > livable.[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > --[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > +------------------------+-------------------------------------------+[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > | Terje A. Bergesen | [email protected][/usenetquote2]
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Actually it was scientists in pursuit of knowledge for its own sake who made the
fundamental discoveries that led to most of these developments. Without such work
industry would often not know where to start looking for the next new treatment.
Sometimes this fundamental research is funded by private companies. Often it isn't.
In recent years that has been increasingly less the case that it is.
Your child-like naivete (or maybe it's just ignorance) is simply stunning if you or
Terje believe that there is a one-to-one, cause and effect relationship between free
enterprize and the examples you've both given. Maybe you've both been reading too
much libertarian "economics" without engaging your critical faculties.
>
[usenetquote2]> > Margaret Bartley wrote:[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > ...[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > > http://www.globalexchange.org/ftaa/statement040201.html[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > > This is a complete capitulation to corporate greedsters.[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > Who are these corporate greedsters? What do they do? How is the world fairing[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > under their tyranny?[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > They are us, you and I. We have our 401K money placed squarely in their corner.[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > Our jobs depend on them being as greedy as they can possibly be.[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > They create jobs, some in the US, who has the lowest unemployment in a very long[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > time. They create products, ever cheaper such, so that we can now buy "stuff" for[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > a fraction of what it cost in our parents time.[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > How is the world doing under this tyranny? Well, this corporate globalism has had[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > its strongest growth since the early '80, and onwards. In 1980 40.000 people died[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > of starvation every day. In those days there was somewhere around 4B people in[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > the world. In 1999 20.000 people died every day of starvation, a SUBSTANTIAL[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > reduction. Most of this reduction comes from increased global trade, hardly any[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > from aid programs, and some, but extremely little, from population movement. You[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > need to solve the problems where they are.[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > What wrong did these corporate greedsters do so that the number of people[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > starving to death has been halved while the worlds population has increased by[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > almost 50%? Where is their crime?[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > In the same time, the difference between rich and poor in the US has increased.[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > This is a problem, and it is a problem that should be solved. Domestic poverty is[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > something the US should not have to deal with. There will always be transition[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > periods, but the current situation is too bad. It can be solved by finding ways[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > to create jobs in areas where jobs are dissapearing, but one must also realize[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > that some movement of people will be needed, all areas are not meant to be[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > livable.[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > --[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > +------------------------+-------------------------------------------+[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > | Terje A. Bergesen | [email protected][/usenetquote2]
Jun 2nd 2001, 9:00 pm
#70
Guest
Posts: n/a
Well, it won't cause inflation unless the Fed lets it create inflation. It all
depends on where Greenspan thinks the tradeoff ought to be made.
>
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > 4.4%-- yeah right. It is almost as if no layoffs have ever occurred. Amazing that[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > we have a record number of layoffs in 2001 and unemployment is going down.[/usenetquote2]
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
depends on where Greenspan thinks the tradeoff ought to be made.
>
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > 4.4%-- yeah right. It is almost as if no layoffs have ever occurred. Amazing that[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > we have a record number of layoffs in 2001 and unemployment is going down.[/usenetquote2]
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Jun 2nd 2001, 9:01 pm
#71
Guest
Posts: n/a
Wrong, as usual.
>
Health,
>
Then
>
for it
>
>
>
>
>
>
[usenetquote2]> > Well said. Actually these corporate "greedsters" are doing far far more[/usenetquote2]
for
[usenetquote2]> > the welfare and good of humanity than all the anti-H-1Bers and other[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > anti-corporate types combined. Next time you have to get a medical[/usenetquote2]
treatment
[usenetquote2]> > that saves your life, or an MRI finds a cancer before it has spread, or[/usenetquote2]
any
[usenetquote2]> > of a great number of other things that save or prolong a life, look and[/usenetquote2]
see
[usenetquote2]> > what human endeavor has made the instruments of your salvation. It is[/usenetquote2]
not
[usenetquote2]> > the name of Greenpeace or Shame-H-1B or Norm Matloff whose name is on[/usenetquote2]
the
[usenetquote2]> > side of the MRI, or medicine, or other stuff, it is corporate[/usenetquote2]
"greedsters"
[usenetquote2]> > like GE, Baxter Healthcare, Abbott Labs, etc. And it wasn't charity or altruism[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > that led them to supply that life-saving technology or drug[/usenetquote2]
either.
[usenetquote2]> > It was good old greed.[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > > Margaret Bartley wrote:[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > > ...[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > > > http://www.globalexchange.org/ftaa/statement040201.html[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > > >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > > > This is a complete capitulation to corporate greedsters.[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > > Who are these corporate greedsters? What do they do? How is the world fairing[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > > under their tyranny?[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > > They are us, you and I. We have our 401K money placed squarely in their corner.[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > > Our jobs depend on them being as greedy as they can possibly be.[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > > They create jobs, some in the US, who has the lowest unemployment in a very[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > > long time. They create products, ever cheaper such, so that we can now buy[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > > "stuff" for a fraction of what it cost in our parents time.[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > > How is the world doing under this tyranny? Well, this corporate globalism has[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > > had its strongest growth since the early '80, and onwards. In 1980 40.000[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > > people died of starvation every day. In those days there was somewhere around[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > > 4B people in the world. In 1999 20.000 people died every day of starvation, a[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > > SUBSTANTIAL reduction. Most of this reduction comes from increased global[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > > trade, hardly any from aid programs, and some, but extremely little, from[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > > population movement. You need to solve the problems where they are.[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > > What wrong did these corporate greedsters do so that the number of people[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > > starving to death has been halved while the worlds population has increased by[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > > almost 50%? Where is their crime?[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > > In the same time, the difference between rich and poor in the US has increased.[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > > This is a problem, and it is a problem that should be solved. Domestic poverty[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > > is something the US should not have to deal with. There will always be[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > > transition periods, but the current situation is too bad. It can be solved by[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > > finding ways to create jobs in areas where jobs are dissapearing, but one must[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > > also realize that some movement of people will be needed, all areas are not[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > > meant to be livable.[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > > --[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > > +------------------------+-------------------------------------------+[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > > | Terje A. Bergesen | [email protected] | Santa Monica, CA |[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > > | http://terje.bivrost.com/ | Living it, loving it |[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > > | http://ingrid.bivrost.com/ |[/usenetquote2]
>
Health,
>
Then
>
for it
>
>
>
>
>
>
[usenetquote2]> > Well said. Actually these corporate "greedsters" are doing far far more[/usenetquote2]
for
[usenetquote2]> > the welfare and good of humanity than all the anti-H-1Bers and other[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > anti-corporate types combined. Next time you have to get a medical[/usenetquote2]
treatment
[usenetquote2]> > that saves your life, or an MRI finds a cancer before it has spread, or[/usenetquote2]
any
[usenetquote2]> > of a great number of other things that save or prolong a life, look and[/usenetquote2]
see
[usenetquote2]> > what human endeavor has made the instruments of your salvation. It is[/usenetquote2]
not
[usenetquote2]> > the name of Greenpeace or Shame-H-1B or Norm Matloff whose name is on[/usenetquote2]
the
[usenetquote2]> > side of the MRI, or medicine, or other stuff, it is corporate[/usenetquote2]
"greedsters"
[usenetquote2]> > like GE, Baxter Healthcare, Abbott Labs, etc. And it wasn't charity or altruism[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > that led them to supply that life-saving technology or drug[/usenetquote2]
either.
[usenetquote2]> > It was good old greed.[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > > Margaret Bartley wrote:[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > > ...[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > > > http://www.globalexchange.org/ftaa/statement040201.html[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > > >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > > > This is a complete capitulation to corporate greedsters.[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > > Who are these corporate greedsters? What do they do? How is the world fairing[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > > under their tyranny?[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > > They are us, you and I. We have our 401K money placed squarely in their corner.[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > > Our jobs depend on them being as greedy as they can possibly be.[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > > They create jobs, some in the US, who has the lowest unemployment in a very[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > > long time. They create products, ever cheaper such, so that we can now buy[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > > "stuff" for a fraction of what it cost in our parents time.[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > > How is the world doing under this tyranny? Well, this corporate globalism has[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > > had its strongest growth since the early '80, and onwards. In 1980 40.000[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > > people died of starvation every day. In those days there was somewhere around[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > > 4B people in the world. In 1999 20.000 people died every day of starvation, a[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > > SUBSTANTIAL reduction. Most of this reduction comes from increased global[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > > trade, hardly any from aid programs, and some, but extremely little, from[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > > population movement. You need to solve the problems where they are.[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > > What wrong did these corporate greedsters do so that the number of people[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > > starving to death has been halved while the worlds population has increased by[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > > almost 50%? Where is their crime?[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > > In the same time, the difference between rich and poor in the US has increased.[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > > This is a problem, and it is a problem that should be solved. Domestic poverty[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > > is something the US should not have to deal with. There will always be[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > > transition periods, but the current situation is too bad. It can be solved by[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > > finding ways to create jobs in areas where jobs are dissapearing, but one must[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > > also realize that some movement of people will be needed, all areas are not[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > > meant to be livable.[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > > --[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > > +------------------------+-------------------------------------------+[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > > | Terje A. Bergesen | [email protected] | Santa Monica, CA |[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > > | http://terje.bivrost.com/ | Living it, loving it |[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > > | http://ingrid.bivrost.com/ |[/usenetquote2]
Jun 2nd 2001, 9:22 pm
#72
Guest
Posts: n/a
Terje,
How long have you been an American citizen for?
On Sat, 02 Jun 2001 20:06:56 GMT, "Terje A. Bergesen"
>
[usenetquote2]>>[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]>> Jacobson--Yeah. Paid for by the public through the National Institute of Health,[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]>> the military, or other government/public funded research and development. Then[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]>> capitalized on by the corporations and sold back to the public who paid for it in[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]>> the first place.[/usenetquote2]
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
How long have you been an American citizen for?
On Sat, 02 Jun 2001 20:06:56 GMT, "Terje A. Bergesen"
>
[usenetquote2]>>[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]>> Jacobson--Yeah. Paid for by the public through the National Institute of Health,[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]>> the military, or other government/public funded research and development. Then[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]>> capitalized on by the corporations and sold back to the public who paid for it in[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]>> the first place.[/usenetquote2]
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Jun 2nd 2001, 9:45 pm
#73
Guest
Posts: n/a
Terje, you are so clueless about anything. You have lost all credibility with a
stupid statement like that. You have only been in this country a couple of years and
you think you know it all.
On Sat, 02 Jun 2001 20:06:56 GMT, "Terje A. Bergesen"
>
[usenetquote2]>>[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]>> Jacobson--Yeah. Paid for by the public through the National Institute of Health,[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]>> the military, or other government/public funded research and development. Then[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]>> capitalized on by the corporations and sold back to the public who paid for it in[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]>> the first place.[/usenetquote2]
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
stupid statement like that. You have only been in this country a couple of years and
you think you know it all.
On Sat, 02 Jun 2001 20:06:56 GMT, "Terje A. Bergesen"
>
[usenetquote2]>>[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]>> Jacobson--Yeah. Paid for by the public through the National Institute of Health,[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]>> the military, or other government/public funded research and development. Then[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]>> capitalized on by the corporations and sold back to the public who paid for it in[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]>> the first place.[/usenetquote2]
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Jun 2nd 2001, 9:46 pm
#74
Guest
Posts: n/a
He isn't an American citizen. He is an H1 visa holder.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
[usenetquote2]>>Tom Lehman wrote:[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]>>>[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]>>> Jacobson--Yeah. Paid for by the public through the National Institute of Health,[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]>>> the military, or other government/public funded research and development. Then[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]>>> capitalized on by the corporations and sold back to the public who paid for it in[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]>>> the first place.[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]>>[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]>>Oh please... when did the government or any of its agencies come up with anything[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]>>new? Inventions and discoveries are in general made in private companies who spend[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]>>MUCH more money on such research than the government does. Why? Because when they[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]>>come up with something new, they can use it to make money. Why, because you are[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]>>willing to pay for that device/medication/invention. Why are you willing to pay for[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]>>it, because it will make your life better.[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]>>[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]>>The vast majority of discoveries are made in companies today, and they capitlize on[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]>>it. If it hadn't been for the fact that they can, we wouldn't have those[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]>>inventions.[/usenetquote2]
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
[usenetquote2]>>Tom Lehman wrote:[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]>>>[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]>>> Jacobson--Yeah. Paid for by the public through the National Institute of Health,[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]>>> the military, or other government/public funded research and development. Then[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]>>> capitalized on by the corporations and sold back to the public who paid for it in[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]>>> the first place.[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]>>[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]>>Oh please... when did the government or any of its agencies come up with anything[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]>>new? Inventions and discoveries are in general made in private companies who spend[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]>>MUCH more money on such research than the government does. Why? Because when they[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]>>come up with something new, they can use it to make money. Why, because you are[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]>>willing to pay for that device/medication/invention. Why are you willing to pay for[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]>>it, because it will make your life better.[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]>>[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]>>The vast majority of discoveries are made in companies today, and they capitlize on[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]>>it. If it hadn't been for the fact that they can, we wouldn't have those[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]>>inventions.[/usenetquote2]
Jun 2nd 2001, 10:22 pm
#75
Guest
Posts: n/a
That sounds pretty racist to me! That is a very offensive statement you make here.
Terje, you sure are pretty bold to make racist comments such as this. Please get the
**** out of this country, there are enough racists as it is.
On Sat, 02 Jun 2001 07:27:49 GMT, "Terje A. Bergesen"
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Terje, you sure are pretty bold to make racist comments such as this. Please get the
**** out of this country, there are enough racists as it is.
On Sat, 02 Jun 2001 07:27:49 GMT, "Terje A. Bergesen"
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>