Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

neuromancer

Regulars
  • Content Count

    19
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About neuromancer

  • Rank
    Novice

Previous Fields

  • Country
    Not Specified
  • State (US/Canadian)
    Not Specified
  1. Not necessarily. As I pointed out earlier only through total de-regulation, and allowing market forces decide, can we find out for sure.
  2. If an "unfettered human mind" can deal with the potentialy irreversable effects of global warming, does it not stand to reason that that same mind could devise ways to prevent, or reduce, those effects before they happen, with out reducing our standard of living? The burning of fossil fuels is not the only potential means of producing electricity. It's just the method that is most engrained.
  3. I agree that one cannot definitively argue if so-called "global warming" is caused by human activity. However, the cloud of smog that engulfs the city of Los Angeles is clearly the result of human activity. This shows that we are polluting the air to the point of negative consequences. Given that, wouldn't it make sense to assume that we are the culprit of "global warming" and act accordingly, rather than do nothing and realize, when it is too late, that we could have prevented or reduced it. The solution to increasing "environmentaly friendly" practices is not more regulation, however
  4. Yeah, if someone is accepting British Pounds in New York for an Armani suit, no one cares. They had the guy who owns all of the restaurants on Fox this morning and he was very good. I think he made a fool of the two hosts. I'm not sure if they are upset that he is "encouraging illegal immigrants" or if it's because he is, I'm assuming, a foreigner running a successful business.....Most likely just a combination of both. The thing that upsets me is that if this can make it to prime time news, next thing one knows, laws are being passed outlawing money altogether.
  5. Has everyone heard about the Pizza Chain in Texas that is accepting Pesos as payment? I think I've only heard about it on the Fox News channel. Kinda weird that they are making such a big deal of it......well i guess not, its Fox.
  6. You do sell you "life" when you get up and go to work or do any kind or work for an employer in exchange for something else.
  7. I conceed that I confused the quote from the book. Francisco is never directly asked about sports. And he asks "what for" "about any activity proposed to him." I apologize for not doing my homework before responding.
  8. Remember what Franciso's reaction to sports was? He asks: Whats the point?
  9. If one were too look at this situation from a purely capitalist point of view, then the players are wrong. The employer, the NBA, clearly does not want its employees assaulting the fans, the customers, because it would result in a loss of ticket sales. If the NBA announces that players are not allowed to touch, assault or approach a fan then the player has two choices: comply or quit. None of the "I was assaulted so I have the right to fight back" arguments have any bearing in this situation. The only way this would be a factor is if the player assaulted the fan and was then fired or quit,
  10. LoL They are lucky that the arenas are filled with so many people that have nothing better to do than watch a bunch of dummies run around. It makes me sick that so many peoples lives revolve around sports. It just goes to show where this country is headed. It is relevant to the issue of the fight because the players are entertainers who have to deal with fans on a nightly basis. They should demonstrate self control in situations like that.
  11. basketball players are entertainers playing a sport that has no point or value in the first place. They should consider themselves lucky that they are where they are making money for what they do. That "player" beat up a customer. For making the kind of money for what they do, they should have to let all of the fans sucker punch them on the way out of the arena.
  12. I don't know the answers to all of your questions, but I think I can help with the last one. A police officer is not schooled to understand the laws he enforces the same way a judge or magistrate is. Officers must first gather and present evidence before a judge requesting a warrant. The judge then makes a decision as to whether or not there is enough evidence to support the issuing of a search warrant.
×
×
  • Create New...