• Three Body Problem

    From BCFD 36@21:1/5 to All on Fri Aug 16 11:26:20 2024
    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?)

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Lee Gleason@21:1/5 to All on Fri Aug 16 20:49:28 2024
    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
    [email protected]

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From D@21:1/5 to Lynn McGuire on Sat Aug 17 11:51:46 2024
    This message is in MIME format. The first part should be readable text,
    while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools.

    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.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From D@21:1/5 to Lynn McGuire on Sat Aug 17 21:52:07 2024
    This message is in MIME format. The first part should be readable text,
    while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools.

    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.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From D@21:1/5 to Cryptoengineer on Sun Aug 18 11:10:13 2024
    This message is in MIME format. The first part should be readable text,
    while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools.

    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.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Scott Dorsey@21:1/5 to [email protected] on Sun Aug 18 13:24:57 2024
    Cryptoengineer <[email protected]> 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."

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Paul S Person@21:1/5 to [email protected] on Sun Aug 18 09:13:01 2024
    On Sat, 17 Aug 2024 11:51:46 +0200, D <[email protected]> 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.'"

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Paul S Person@21:1/5 to [email protected] on Sun Aug 18 09:19:19 2024
    On Sat, 17 Aug 2024 13:42:46 -0500, Lynn McGuire
    <[email protected]> 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.'"

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Paul S Person@21:1/5 to [email protected] on Sun Aug 18 09:21:26 2024
    On Sat, 17 Aug 2024 21:52:07 +0200, D <[email protected]> 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.'"

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Bobbie Sellers@21:1/5 to All on Sun Aug 18 10:15:13 2024
    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

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Chris Buckley@21:1/5 to Paul S Person on Sun Aug 18 20:00:50 2024
    On 2024-08-18, Paul S Person <[email protected]d> 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

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From D@21:1/5 to Paul S Person on Sun Aug 18 23:52:53 2024
    This message is in MIME format. The first part should be readable text,
    while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools.

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

    On Sat, 17 Aug 2024 21:52:07 +0200, D <[email protected]> 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.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From D@21:1/5 to Paul S Person on Sun Aug 18 23:20:27 2024
    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.


    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Scott Dorsey@21:1/5 to [email protected] on Sun Aug 18 21:56:50 2024
    Chris Buckley <[email protected]> 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."

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From D@21:1/5 to Lynn McGuire on Mon Aug 19 00:00:02 2024
    This message is in MIME format. The first part should be readable text,
    while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools.

    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
    <[email protected]> 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.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Chris Buckley@21:1/5 to Scott Dorsey on Mon Aug 19 01:11:05 2024
    On 2024-08-18, Scott Dorsey <[email protected]> wrote:
    Chris Buckley <[email protected]> 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

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Dimensional Traveler@21:1/5 to Chris Buckley on Sun Aug 18 20:11:04 2024
    On 8/18/2024 6:11 PM, Chris Buckley wrote:
    On 2024-08-18, Scott Dorsey <[email protected]> wrote:
    Chris Buckley <[email protected]> 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.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From D@21:1/5 to Chris Buckley on Mon Aug 19 09:57:18 2024
    This message is in MIME format. The first part should be readable text,
    while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools.

    On Mon, 19 Aug 2024, Chris Buckley wrote:

    On 2024-08-18, Scott Dorsey <[email protected]> wrote:
    Chris Buckley <[email protected]> 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.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From D@21:1/5 to quadibloc on Mon Aug 19 10:06:54 2024
    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.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Paul S Person@21:1/5 to All on Mon Aug 19 08:24:46 2024
    On Mon, 19 Aug 2024 06:35:08 +0000, quadibloc <[email protected]>
    wrote:

    On Sun, 18 Aug 2024 16:21:26 +0000, Paul S Person wrote:
    On Sat, 17 Aug 2024 21:52:07 +0200, D <[email protected]> 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.'"

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Paul S Person@21:1/5 to [email protected] on Mon Aug 19 08:16:06 2024
    On Mon, 19 Aug 2024 10:06:54 +0200, D <[email protected]> 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.'"

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Paul S Person@21:1/5 to [email protected] on Mon Aug 19 08:47:54 2024
    On Mon, 19 Aug 2024 00:00:02 +0200, D <[email protected]> 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
    <[email protected]> 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.'"

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Paul S Person@21:1/5 to Chris Buckley on Mon Aug 19 08:56:08 2024
    On 18 Aug 2024 20:00:50 GMT, Chris Buckley <[email protected]> wrote:

    On 2024-08-18, Paul S Person <[email protected]d> 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.'"

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Paul S Person@21:1/5 to [email protected] on Mon Aug 19 08:34:15 2024
    On Sun, 18 Aug 2024 10:15:13 -0700, Bobbie Sellers <[email protected]> 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.'"

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From D@21:1/5 to Paul S Person on Mon Aug 19 19:46:27 2024
    On Mon, 19 Aug 2024, Paul S Person wrote:

    On Mon, 19 Aug 2024 10:06:54 +0200, D <[email protected]> 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.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From D@21:1/5 to Paul S Person on Mon Aug 19 19:54:16 2024
    This message is in MIME format. The first part should be readable text,
    while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools.

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

    On Mon, 19 Aug 2024 00:00:02 +0200, D <[email protected]> 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
    <[email protected]> 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.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Bobbie Sellers@21:1/5 to All on Mon Aug 19 14:08:09 2024
    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

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Bobbie Sellers@21:1/5 to All on Mon Aug 19 14:16:00 2024
    On 8/19/24 00:57, D wrote:


    On Mon, 19 Aug 2024, Chris Buckley wrote:

    On 2024-08-18, Scott Dorsey <[email protected]> wrote:
    Chris Buckley  <[email protected]> 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

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From D@21:1/5 to Lynn McGuire on Tue Aug 20 10:30:42 2024
    This message is in MIME format. The first part should be readable text,
    while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools.

    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.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Bice@21:1/5 to [email protected] on Tue Aug 20 12:27:16 2024
    On Fri, 16 Aug 2024 11:26:20 -0700, BCFD 36 <[email protected]> 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

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Chris Buckley@21:1/5 to Paul S Person on Tue Aug 20 15:05:59 2024
    On 2024-08-19, Paul S Person <[email protected]d> wrote:
    On 18 Aug 2024 20:00:50 GMT, Chris Buckley <[email protected]> wrote:

    On 2024-08-18, Paul S Person <[email protected]d> 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

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Paul S Person@21:1/5 to [email protected] on Tue Aug 20 08:51:30 2024
    On Mon, 19 Aug 2024 14:08:09 -0700, Bobbie Sellers <[email protected]> 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.'"

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Paul S Person@21:1/5 to [email protected] on Tue Aug 20 08:57:08 2024
    On Mon, 19 Aug 2024 19:54:16 +0200, D <[email protected]> wrote:



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

    On Mon, 19 Aug 2024 00:00:02 +0200, D <[email protected]> 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
    <[email protected]> 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.'"

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From D@21:1/5 to Paul S Person on Tue Aug 20 20:38:08 2024
    This message is in MIME format. The first part should be readable text,
    while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools.

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

    On Mon, 19 Aug 2024 19:54:16 +0200, D <[email protected]> wrote:



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

    On Mon, 19 Aug 2024 00:00:02 +0200, D <[email protected]> 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
    <[email protected]> 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.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Scott Lurndal@21:1/5 to [email protected] on Tue Aug 20 20:48:43 2024
    D <[email protected]> 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.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Dimensional Traveler@21:1/5 to Chris Buckley on Tue Aug 20 17:44:44 2024
    On 8/20/2024 8:05 AM, Chris Buckley wrote:
    On 2024-08-19, Paul S Person <[email protected]d> wrote:
    On 18 Aug 2024 20:00:50 GMT, Chris Buckley <[email protected]> wrote:

    On 2024-08-18, Paul S Person <[email protected]d> 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.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Chris Buckley@21:1/5 to Dimensional Traveler on Wed Aug 21 01:26:09 2024
    On 2024-08-21, Dimensional Traveler <[email protected]> wrote:
    On 8/20/2024 8:05 AM, Chris Buckley wrote:
    On 2024-08-19, Paul S Person <[email protected]d> wrote:
    On 18 Aug 2024 20:00:50 GMT, Chris Buckley <[email protected]> wrote:

    On 2024-08-18, Paul S Person <[email protected]d> 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

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From D@21:1/5 to Scott Lurndal on Wed Aug 21 09:02:34 2024
    On Tue, 20 Aug 2024, Scott Lurndal wrote:

    D <[email protected]> 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.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From D@21:1/5 to Cryptoengineer on Wed Aug 21 17:01:04 2024
    This message is in MIME format. The first part should be readable text,
    while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools.

    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 <[email protected]> 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. ;)

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Paul S Person@21:1/5 to All on Wed Aug 21 08:41:23 2024
    On Tue, 20 Aug 2024 20:48:43 GMT, [email protected] (Scott Lurndal)
    wrote:

    D <[email protected]> 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.'"

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Paul S Person@21:1/5 to Chris Buckley on Wed Aug 21 08:59:09 2024
    On 20 Aug 2024 15:05:59 GMT, Chris Buckley <[email protected]> wrote:

    On 2024-08-19, Paul S Person <[email protected]d> 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.'"

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Scott Dorsey@21:1/5 to [email protected] on Wed Aug 21 21:47:48 2024
    Chris Buckley <[email protected]> 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."

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Dimensional Traveler@21:1/5 to Lynn McGuire on Wed Aug 21 17:45:24 2024
    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 <[email protected]> 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.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Robert Woodward@21:1/5 to Dimensional Traveler on Wed Aug 21 22:07:00 2024
    In article <va61n2$2c62$[email protected]>,
    Dimensional Traveler <[email protected]> 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 <[email protected]> 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 [email protected]

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Bobbie Sellers@21:1/5 to Lynn McGuire on Thu Aug 22 00:09:44 2024
    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

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Bobbie Sellers@21:1/5 to Robert Woodward on Wed Aug 21 23:59:13 2024
    On 8/21/24 22:07, Robert Woodward wrote:
    In article <va61n2$2c62$[email protected]>,
    Dimensional Traveler <[email protected]> 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 <[email protected]> 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

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From D@21:1/5 to Scott Dorsey on Thu Aug 22 10:06:46 2024
    On Wed, 21 Aug 2024, Scott Dorsey wrote:

    Chris Buckley <[email protected]> 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.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From D@21:1/5 to Lynn McGuire on Thu Aug 22 10:14:19 2024
    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.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Chris Buckley@21:1/5 to Scott Dorsey on Thu Aug 22 11:40:31 2024
    On 2024-08-21, Scott Dorsey <[email protected]> wrote:
    Chris Buckley <[email protected]> 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

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Chris Buckley@21:1/5 to Dimensional Traveler on Thu Aug 22 13:55:33 2024
    On 2024-08-22, Dimensional Traveler <[email protected]> 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

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Chris Buckley@21:1/5 to Paul S Person on Thu Aug 22 13:50:01 2024
    On 2024-08-21, Paul S Person <[email protected]d> wrote:
    On 20 Aug 2024 15:05:59 GMT, Chris Buckley <[email protected]> wrote:

    On 2024-08-19, Paul S Person <[email protected]d> 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

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Scott Lurndal@21:1/5 to [email protected] on Thu Aug 22 14:24:25 2024
    D <[email protected]> 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"

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Scott Lurndal@21:1/5 to Lynn McGuire on Thu Aug 22 14:18:22 2024
    Lynn McGuire <[email protected]> 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.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Bobbie Sellers@21:1/5 to Scott Lurndal on Thu Aug 22 07:50:19 2024
    On 8/22/24 07:24, Scott Lurndal wrote:
    D <[email protected]> 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

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Paul S Person@21:1/5 to [email protected] on Thu Aug 22 08:26:22 2024
    On Thu, 22 Aug 2024 01:28:11 -0500, Lynn McGuire
    <[email protected]> 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.'"

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Paul S Person@21:1/5 to [email protected] on Thu Aug 22 08:31:29 2024
    On Thu, 22 Aug 2024 07:50:19 -0700, Bobbie Sellers <[email protected]> wrote:

    On 8/22/24 07:24, Scott Lurndal wrote:
    D <[email protected]> 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.'"

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Paul S Person@21:1/5 to [email protected] on Thu Aug 22 08:18:48 2024
    On Wed, 21 Aug 2024 23:59:13 -0700, Bobbie Sellers <[email protected]> wrote:

    On 8/21/24 22:07, Robert Woodward wrote:
    In article <va61n2$2c62$[email protected]>,
    Dimensional Traveler <[email protected]> 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 <[email protected]> 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.'"

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Paul S Person@21:1/5 to Chris Buckley on Thu Aug 22 08:36:47 2024
    On 22 Aug 2024 11:40:31 GMT, Chris Buckley <[email protected]> wrote:

    On 2024-08-21, Scott Dorsey <[email protected]> wrote:
    Chris Buckley <[email protected]> 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.'"

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Paul S Person@21:1/5 to Chris Buckley on Thu Aug 22 08:54:18 2024
    On 22 Aug 2024 13:50:01 GMT, Chris Buckley <[email protected]> wrote:

    On 2024-08-21, Paul S Person <[email protected]d> wrote:
    On 20 Aug 2024 15:05:59 GMT, Chris Buckley <[email protected]> wrote:

    On 2024-08-19, Paul S Person <[email protected]d> 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.'"

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Scott Dorsey@21:1/5 to [email protected] on Thu Aug 22 16:38:30 2024
    Lynn McGuire <[email protected]> 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."

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From James Nicoll@21:1/5 to Scott Dorsey on Thu Aug 22 17:29:59 2024
    In article <va7pi6$h2o$[email protected]>,
    Scott Dorsey <[email protected]> wrote:
    Lynn McGuire <[email protected]> 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

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From D@21:1/5 to Paul S Person on Thu Aug 22 21:11:51 2024
    On Thu, 22 Aug 2024, Paul S Person wrote:

    On Thu, 22 Aug 2024 07:50:19 -0700, Bobbie Sellers <[email protected]> wrote:

    On 8/22/24 07:24, Scott Lurndal wrote:
    D <[email protected]> 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.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From D@21:1/5 to Scott Lurndal on Thu Aug 22 21:05:07 2024
    On Thu, 22 Aug 2024, Scott Lurndal wrote:

    D <[email protected]> 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
    .

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Chris Buckley@21:1/5 to Paul S Person on Thu Aug 22 20:26:11 2024
    On 2024-08-22, Paul S Person <[email protected]d> wrote:
    On 22 Aug 2024 13:50:01 GMT, Chris Buckley <[email protected]> wrote:

    On 2024-08-21, Paul S Person <[email protected]d> wrote:
    On 20 Aug 2024 15:05:59 GMT, Chris Buckley <[email protected]> wrote:

    On 2024-08-19, Paul S Person <[email protected]d> 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

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Dimensional Traveler@21:1/5 to Paul S Person on Thu Aug 22 18:07:06 2024
    On 8/22/2024 8:18 AM, Paul S Person wrote:
    On Wed, 21 Aug 2024 23:59:13 -0700, Bobbie Sellers <[email protected]> wrote:

    On 8/21/24 22:07, Robert Woodward wrote:
    In article <va61n2$2c62$[email protected]>,
    Dimensional Traveler <[email protected]> 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 <[email protected]> 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.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Bobbie Sellers@21:1/5 to All on Thu Aug 22 21:03:03 2024
    On 8/22/24 12:05, D wrote:


    On Thu, 22 Aug 2024, Scott Lurndal wrote:

    D <[email protected]> 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

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Paul S Person@21:1/5 to Nicoll on Fri Aug 23 08:26:24 2024
    On Thu, 22 Aug 2024 17:29:59 -0000 (UTC), [email protected] (James
    Nicoll) wrote:

    In article <va7pi6$h2o$[email protected]>,
    Scott Dorsey <[email protected]> wrote:
    Lynn McGuire <[email protected]> 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?

    No more than the Earned Income Credit, by allowing employers to pay
    less than a living wage, counts as a minimum wage.
    --
    "Here lies the Tuscan poet Aretino,
    Who evil spoke of everyone but God,
    Giving as his excuse, 'I never knew him.'"

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Paul S Person@21:1/5 to [email protected] on Fri Aug 23 08:24:06 2024
    On Thu, 22 Aug 2024 21:03:03 -0700, Bobbie Sellers <[email protected]> wrote:

    On 8/22/24 12:05, D wrote:


    On Thu, 22 Aug 2024, Scott Lurndal wrote:

    D <[email protected]> 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.

    Those plans may have worked, but having an actual /medical system/
    instead of merely a /medical industry/ might have helped more.

    The thought here is that, in a medical system, senior housing
    facilities would not get to the point because most of the staff was as
    sick as the inmates; staff from the rest of the /system/ would have
    been temporarily re-assigned to help. But our medical industry did no
    such thing, at least in the Seattle area at the start (and we /were/
    the start: the first USA case was in such a facility and they were hit
    hard).

    A medical /system/ might also have started training nurses as soon as
    the pandemic started, to the point that they could at least take some
    of the burden off of the fully-trained nurses being worked to death.
    --
    "Here lies the Tuscan poet Aretino,
    Who evil spoke of everyone but God,
    Giving as his excuse, 'I never knew him.'"

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Paul S Person@21:1/5 to [email protected] on Fri Aug 23 08:28:58 2024
    On Thu, 22 Aug 2024 22:23:35 -0400, Cryptoengineer
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    On 8/22/2024 11:54 AM, Paul S Person wrote:
    On 22 Aug 2024 13:50:01 GMT, Chris Buckley <[email protected]> wrote:

    On 2024-08-21, Paul S Person <[email protected]d> wrote:
    On 20 Aug 2024 15:05:59 GMT, Chris Buckley <[email protected]> wrote:

    On 2024-08-19, Paul S Person <[email protected]d> 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

    I probably didn't.
    --
    "Here lies the Tuscan poet Aretino,
    Who evil spoke of everyone but God,
    Giving as his excuse, 'I never knew him.'"

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From The Horny Goat@21:1/5 to [email protected] on Fri Aug 30 13:16:56 2024
    On Fri, 23 Aug 2024 08:28:58 -0700, Paul S Person
    <[email protected]d> wrote:

    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.

    Why is that worse than when Justin Trudeau was a high school teacher
    he played in blackfrace in a school production (which was shown in the
    high school annual and reprinted during his run for prime minister
    years later)?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Paul S Person@21:1/5 to All on Sat Aug 31 08:37:37 2024
    On Fri, 30 Aug 2024 13:16:56 -0700, The Horny Goat <[email protected]>
    wrote:

    On Fri, 23 Aug 2024 08:28:58 -0700, Paul S Person ><[email protected]d> wrote:

    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.

    Why is that worse than when Justin Trudeau was a high school teacher
    he played in blackfrace in a school production (which was shown in the
    high school annual and reprinted during his run for prime minister
    years later)?

    Who said it was worse? Or better, for that matter?
    --
    "Here lies the Tuscan poet Aretino,
    Who evil spoke of everyone but God,
    Giving as his excuse, 'I never knew him.'"

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)