Looking for a mid-size domestic car recommendation

No, this is a fallacious analogy ... and analogy has long been called
the weakest form of argument. I never advocated destroying anything or
causing intentional damage. I simply pointed out that money is a
resource just as is labor, machinery, etc. A resource that is idle
contributes nothing to the economy - doesn't matter if the resource is
an unemployed person, an idle mining machine or idle money. If you
really believe that moving money from an idle state to a useful state is
the same as throwing a stone through a window, then no logical argument
will change your mind.

All of the above require money. If the miners, farmers and
manufacturers don't have money to buy equipment, etc., then they won't
be creating wealth. Money under your mattress doesn nothing. Money
invested in a mine or farm can contribute a lot.

I agree ... you obviously haven't figured this all out. And where did
you get this idea of destroying property to make money flow? I never
said that or even subtly implied it in what I wrote above.


Matt

 

I like the Buffit response. Though one does wonder why the Exxon
Valdez <sp> spill was counted as adding to the GDP the year that
happened (or why Exxon hasn't paid yet for the cleanup).

Wealth transfer in some circumstances works. (read a bit on the
Plague's effect on the British economy and the effects of war
mobilization in some countries, I won't mention the US but...).

I'm just saying that every toxic cloud has a silver lining (even if it
is only shiny lead....

 

_________________________________________________________

Except that nobody "hoards" money except a few hermits up in the hills.
Money is always invested, one way or the other.

 

_________________________________________________________

Warren Buffet did not "create" any wealth, he merely moved it from
someone else's pocket to his own. He is richer, they are poorer. The
net wealth of the nation is the same.

You're equating money with wealth. In the common vernacular they are
often interchanged, but when discussing economic theory they are two
different things.

 

If there were no shark lawyers, McDonalds would still be burning people,
wouldn't they? People would still be needing surgery, permanent scars
would be created every day, etc, etc.

Serves 'em right. Don't shed too many tears over "innocent" employees
would could have and should have stepped in and demanded their products
be made safe. When was the last time you heard a union calling a strike
in order to make a product safer?

LOL here too.

 

I read it, doesn't change my mind. None of those people should have won
anything. I know coffee burns, its boiling water. This is common sense.
Therefore, I know not to try and mix cream in my coffee while driving down a
road. That would be stupid and I would probably get burned. See how common
sense can work here. If you are stupid, and spill hot coffee on you and you
fucking burn your ass off, its nobody's fault but your own. You cannot have
100º coffee and make it safe for everyone. Because it will taste like shit.
Coffee is a hot beverage made by 200º water and it takes its flavor from the
beans. This doesn't happen until at least 175ºF. You are hell bent on
making coffee cold, want a cold beverage buy ice water. Does that mean that
one day you are gonna work on your car and be a moron and take the radiator
cap off while the system is pressurized and get hot coolant on your self and
burn yourself all over the arm and hand and face and sue Ford or GM or maybe
even Zerex for having coolant that gets hot from being in an engine that was
running? No, cause magically coolant gets hot in an engine. Just like
coffe gets hot in a pot. Its not rocket science here. Its just plain
simple common sense. The only case I could see McDonald's being responsible
for is the one where the employee spilled it on the lady. That is it. The
guy they had in the article that is like, "I went home and told my wife and
daughter not to open a coffee cup while driving cause I didn't know it was
that hot" is an idiot. Who didn't think coffee was hot? Can I see a show
of hands? Let me guess Art, when you are boiling water for noodles do you
just reach in the water to pull the noodles out? I bet you could soo
Muellers for that. Hell maybe even the stove manufacturer.

 

And how hot is the coffee you make in your house? God forbid I stopped over
had a mug and spilled it on myself and had to sue your homeowners for it.

 

Why? Did his 'work' not effect the GNP? Does he not
pay those people that work for him? Are all of those working in
the jobs that now exist, because of his products being sold and
serviced, not compensated? Or
do they not count because they work in air conditioned facilities
and therefore do not work up a 'perspire?'



mike hunt

 

I don't believe the workers in McDonald's restaurants
are unionized.



mike hunt

Bill Turner wrote:

 

Yeah - just last week, I put my hand on a glowing burner on the stove,
and lo and behold, it burned my hand. No one told me!!! Bastards!!! 8^)

Bill Putney
(to reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
address with "x")

 

OK - what if the shop owner has extra money stashed under his matress,
doing nothing for several years. If someone breaks his window and
causes him to have to pull that money out and put it back into
circulation (by having the window fixed), has this helped society?
Riddle me that one.

Bill Putney
(to reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
address with "x")

 

The legal standard for inherently dangerous goods like guns and power saws
is different than that for ordinary goods.

 

Exacty. It is unfortunate that all the politicians seem to look for is
economic growth instead of the standard of living. If everyone had
everything they wanted there would be zero growth and everyone would be
happy.

 

That could change as we evolve more to the "Utopian" society. Some gun
mfgrs. have been hit in recent years with some pretty stupid lawsuits
considering what guns are intended to do.

Bill Putney
(to reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
address with "x")

 

_________________________________________________________

All the money he "paid" his workers ultimately came from someone else's
pocket and created nothing of any value except to Warren. The net
wealth of the nation was not increased one penny.

By comparison, a worker who performs a useful service (installs your
satellite dish) or actually makes something (assembles a car) has
increased the net wealth of the nation.

I'm sure you will see no difference at all.

 

_________________________________________________________

Try as I might, I can not find any point to your post. Try again.

 

_________________________________________________________

Does a worker have to belong to a union to be dissatisfied with the
safety of his product? Did any worker at McDonalds ever raise the
question of possible injury because the coffee was too hot? Or did they
just go with the flow because they were afraid to rock the boat?

 

_________________________________________________________

In that example, one could argue that society is better off, while the
shopkeeper is less well off.

Far more likely, however, is the shopkeeper keeps his money either in a
savings account, invested in stocks or bonds or in some kind of
commercial account. All of which make society better off.

 

Right answer. 8^) (Hmmm - what if he had it in Enron stock?
rhetorical question)

Bill Putney
(to reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
address with "x")

 

Well... that puts you into the 5% of the population that are complete
idiots. Coffee is SUPPOSED to be hot. Thanks to morons like you the only way
to get it hot now is to brew your own.
Bob