tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1179609605244629667.comments2019-12-18T22:24:23.239-05:00The Empty Soda CanJeffhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00447390975580816050noreply@blogger.comBlogger60125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1179609605244629667.post-42204979465988914082014-01-04T21:16:20.678-05:002014-01-04T21:16:20.678-05:00Thanks for the clarification, Christopher. That’s ...Thanks for the clarification, Christopher. That’s a very interesting point, one that I’m sure we could debate for quite a while. :-)Jeffhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00447390975580816050noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1179609605244629667.post-44665131586525983662014-01-04T16:10:51.661-05:002014-01-04T16:10:51.661-05:00Sorry that should have read "the government&#...Sorry that should have read "the government's theoretical role in economics."Christopherhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15298118994815185517noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1179609605244629667.post-32272008976669870582014-01-04T16:08:53.651-05:002014-01-04T16:08:53.651-05:00I am sorry that I might not have explained myself ...I am sorry that I might not have explained myself well. I was asking a theoretical question about hypothetical and not about any events or people, real or perceived.<br /><br />I am in total agreement of everything that has been stated explicitly in those two blog posts. I didn't not mean to imply any belief that anyone associated with FairToAll.org has refused service for bigoted reason, and in particular, Jack Phillips. I agree that what has happened to him, as well as the many other business owners that have suffered due to the overreaching of anti-discrimination laws, is in direct contradiction to what those persecuting them claim to stand for.<br /><br />What I was hoping for was an intellectual discussion on if the government should intervene IF a hypothetical person (not based on anyone, real or otherwise) were to choose to refuse services for bigoted reasons based on the principle of economics and the governments theoretical role in governments. If it is found that the government shouldn't intervene in such events, then the case that you have made, while well stated, would be moot. If it is found that the government should intervene, then the case you have made is well-stated, valid, and I hope those working for Jack Phillips and others will learn from your case.Christopherhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15298118994815185517noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1179609605244629667.post-56288304439448352732014-01-03T22:04:09.209-05:002014-01-03T22:04:09.209-05:00Christopher,
I am also against bigotry in all for...Christopher,<br /><br />I am also against bigotry in all forms, which is exactly why I have posted these two blog entires. It’s horrific how much bigotry is levied against individuals such as Jack Phillips, whom as far as I can tell, want nothing more than to live according to the dictates of their own, respective consciences.<br /><br />So that being said, I respond to your question with two more:<br /><br />1) What gives you the idea that any of the victims listed on FairToAll.org refused service for bigoted reasons?<br /><br />2) Is it okay for people to sue them for bigoted reasons?<br /><br />Thanks.Jeffhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00447390975580816050noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1179609605244629667.post-34831536913351788952014-01-03T15:50:00.450-05:002014-01-03T15:50:00.450-05:00NOTE: I ASK THIS FOR INTELECTUAL INQUIRY AND NOT ...NOTE: I ASK THIS FOR INTELECTUAL INQUIRY AND NOT BASED ON PERSONAL BELIEFS. I AM AGAINST BIGOTRY IN ALL FORMS.<br />Why should a business not be legally allowed to refuse service to an individual for bigoted reasons? <br />One of the foundation principles of economics is that every transaction, every decision, occurs because it increases utility or well-being. It would be consider irrational, from the economist’s viewpoint, for two parties to do business if in the increasing of the first’s well-being it would be to the detriment to that of the other. This is referred as being Pareto efficient. <br />A socially acceptable version of this is friends and family. If your parents were having technical problems and you having a fair bit of technical background offered to help, you probably wouldn’t charge them much, if any, money. You have gained utility in using your skills to help someone you love, they from having a fixed computer, and economics is satisfied. For your clients, they still gain utility from having a fixed computer, but your well-being demands some money (based on how much utility they are gaining) on top of a job well done. Still, however, an agreement is met and both sides are better off. The same services yet a different price because you needed more money in the second case for it to be Pareto efficient. Note that if service is refused by either party, both parties are better off; otherwise a suitable agreement would have been reached.<br />To the bigot, doing something for someone he loathes would definitely be detrimental to his utility. Sure, the avoiding of the inevitable media whiplash, boycotts, etc. from the action (and currently anti-discrimination laws) would contribute to the amount of utility he would get from the transaction. He still could determine, however, that it would require more money (or no amount could and would refuse service) to meet the necessary utility for him to give the service. If upon raising the price the victim still feels it is his best interest to obtain the service than he can still do so or he can take his business elsewhere.<br /><br />Again, note that if service is refused by either party, both parties are better off; otherwise a suitable agreement would have been reached.<br /><br />Therefore, why should a business not be legally allowed to refuse service to an individual for bigoted reasons? <br />Christopherhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15298118994815185517noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1179609605244629667.post-47428080197672164272013-05-29T22:55:27.014-04:002013-05-29T22:55:27.014-04:00You’re very welcome, 3DDR! :-)You’re very welcome, 3DDR! :-)Jeffhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00447390975580816050noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1179609605244629667.post-45546444418210712472013-05-29T22:07:59.023-04:002013-05-29T22:07:59.023-04:00thank you, just want i needed, first google result...thank you, just want i needed, first google result :)Brian Cometahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07920725278966307749noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1179609605244629667.post-22738135476107378522012-11-16T00:22:23.923-05:002012-11-16T00:22:23.923-05:00Danny has a history of sleep walking when he was a...Danny has a history of sleep walking when he was about that age. He walked right out of the house one night and was almost to the street when he was about 7 or 8.Late Night Matt Moderatorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01933974102345365347noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1179609605244629667.post-18744590138680502892012-11-01T11:20:21.424-04:002012-11-01T11:20:21.424-04:00Nick, your point is well taken, but I still mainta...Nick, your point is well taken, but I still maintain that smaller states have a right to be represented in electing the President. Ultimately, I think this is a question of states’ rights vs. federal rights. The popular vote allows us to act as a single nation; the electoral vote allows us to act as a conglomerate of united states. Which be better is based entirely upon your point of view.<br /><br />Cheers! :-)Jeffhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00447390975580816050noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1179609605244629667.post-82927158376768714742012-10-25T15:09:24.101-04:002012-10-25T15:09:24.101-04:00While your point is true, to an extent, if we look...While your point is true, to an extent, if we look at the reality of our current system, many states will pretty much always vote Democrat or Republican, with a key portion of political strategy bent on convincing voters in so-called "swing states". If Mitt Romney's policies gain him an extra 10% of voters in California, despite the massive effect that would have on the popular vote, but absolutely no effect on the result of the election. So instead candidates and political parties shift their policies and their campaigning to things that appeal to voters in swing states. This is great for people in Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Florida, but not for Americans as a whole.<br /><br />Also, fairness of voting has nothing to do with checks and balances, it's about equality. I'm not suggesting we abandon our bicameral congress, which even more heavily weights decisions in favor of small states. This simple little Wikipedia chart shows some of the great inequality in voting: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Pop_per_elector.png<br /><br />So essentially, vote from a citizen in Wyoming or Washington D.C. weighs three times as heavily as a vote from California or Texas. The phrase "checks and balances" refers to branches of government being able to keep each other in balance, the executive branch (the president) has the power to veto laws passed by the legislative branch (congress), while congress can, in turn, override a presidential veto. The judicial branch oversees both with judicial review, yet members of the judicial branch are appointed by the executive branch and confirmed by the legislative branch. Checks and balances does not mean Wyoming's votes for president count three times as much as California's, it means each branch of government keeps the other in check.<br /><br />If the Electoral College were replaced by a direct vote, citizens of small states would still maintain a disproportional impact on national law due to the extreme power of the Senate, so that check and balance would remain intact. <br /><br />I really see no reason why not to completely abandon the electoral college, perhaps a direct popular vote would even help some of the smaller third-party candidates to build some momentum and thus give Americans more choices in future elections.Nick Smithhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05217505026085591040noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1179609605244629667.post-20571209177877561802012-10-24T14:06:08.867-04:002012-10-24T14:06:08.867-04:00Thanks, Nick. I personally think the Great Comprom...Thanks, Nick. I personally think the Great Compromise is still necessary, to protect the needs of the citizens in less-populous states. It’s been pointed out on many occasions that even with the Electoral College intact, all it takes are the eleven most populous states, to win the Presidency. In other words, all a candidate has to do, to win the Presidency, is court people in those eleven states and leave the other 39 behind. The problem with this is that those eleven states have wildly disparate needs and interests (take Texas vs. California, for example), so the Electoral College effectively forces a candidate to court the entire American people as best as possible.<br /><br />Now, imagine if we were to take away the Electoral College. More than half of the population still lives in those eleven states, but now the candidates can completely ignore rural America and concentrate on the major population centers. By espousing policies that favor urbanites, any politician can breeze into the Presidency while alienating everyone who doesn’t live in those few, relatively isolated locations.<br /><br />The Great Compromise was all about checks and balances—the three branches of government, the two Houses of Congress, etc.. If you don’t think checks and balances are as necessary today as they were, a couple of centuries ago, then I suspect we’re going to have to agree to disagree.<br /><br />Thanks again! :-)Jeffhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00447390975580816050noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1179609605244629667.post-80989133161202182152012-10-24T11:45:47.818-04:002012-10-24T11:45:47.818-04:00An interesting discussion here, Jeff, I have two c...An interesting discussion here, Jeff, I have two comments: <br /><br />1. A vote still counts even if it doesn't directly affect the election. The republican party will be closely watching votes on third parties, like libertarian and constitution party candidates, to see how they could change to attract more of those voters next time. (Same thing for the Democratic Party and the Green Party or possibly even the Justice Party).<br /><br />2. While it is true that the primary reason for the continued existence of the Electoral College is due to the Great Compromise, why is such a compromise still necessary? I personally feel there is no reason my vote should be proportionally weighted higher because I live in a less-densely populated state than others. Nor should anyone else's count any more or less, we're all equal and the weight of our votes should reflect that. I would 100% support a constitutional amendment to change to a direct-vote format.Nick Smithhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05217505026085591040noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1179609605244629667.post-63269735640045241652012-07-25T18:09:34.388-04:002012-07-25T18:09:34.388-04:00Well, that's weird.Well, that's weird.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02854554622555295344noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1179609605244629667.post-36271900839272683952012-03-07T22:47:16.650-05:002012-03-07T22:47:16.650-05:00This whole episode is about censorship. It drives ...This whole episode is about censorship. It drives the left crazy the huge audiences for conservative talk radio, while liberal hosts have microscopic ratings. I do not follow Rush, but instead of pressuring advertisers let the people be free to choose if it bothers them. I think the comment was too far but in fairness possibly correct depending on how you define the term. Liberal thought is only bumper sticker deep, so it hard to be interesting on the radio.Bryant Dhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03492033686733800427noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1179609605244629667.post-52712708601496834362011-12-20T13:50:36.792-05:002011-12-20T13:50:36.792-05:00LOLLOLJeffhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00447390975580816050noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1179609605244629667.post-76392004737812409032011-12-20T13:40:01.702-05:002011-12-20T13:40:01.702-05:00I must defend myself and say that it is not my job...I must defend myself and say that it is not my job to clean his office.Annahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02346294633855406139noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1179609605244629667.post-25800447153236003652011-03-05T10:54:27.713-05:002011-03-05T10:54:27.713-05:00Wow!!! That is AMAZING!!! Great job!Wow!!! That is AMAZING!!! Great job!Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02854554622555295344noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1179609605244629667.post-2363249677775121312010-07-16T00:08:40.747-04:002010-07-16T00:08:40.747-04:00I seriously laughed out loud thru the whole post!!...I seriously laughed out loud thru the whole post!! They make microfiber g's now too. Those might be good for staying in place under the shorts.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16400555419570849445noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1179609605244629667.post-10892184783616930172010-07-15T18:02:36.375-04:002010-07-15T18:02:36.375-04:00That sounds great, Patty! Maybe I can even wear th...That sounds great, Patty! Maybe I can even wear the fanny pack *under* the Spandex®, for that coveted put-me-on-the-Discovery-Channel look!Jeffhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00447390975580816050noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1179609605244629667.post-25255904792950796422010-07-15T10:56:30.831-04:002010-07-15T10:56:30.831-04:00K... So here goes...
Here's my solution;)...
1...K... So here goes...<br />Here's my solution;)...<br />1) Spandex... you can get it in long shorts, or pants & it comes in array of pretty colors & patterns.<br />2) Fanny Pack... Holds all of your neccesities, fully adjustable waist, also comes in a variety of pretty colors, & some will hold a bottle of water too;)<br />There You Have It!<br />LOL-HAVE A GREAT RUN!Patricia Larsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15190348628384246115noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1179609605244629667.post-77206501039448135922010-07-15T09:47:46.789-04:002010-07-15T09:47:46.789-04:00Great suggestions, Ed! Thank you! I will definitel...Great suggestions, Ed! Thank you! I will definitely look into them! :-)Jeffhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00447390975580816050noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1179609605244629667.post-9664272306854901922010-07-15T09:40:22.277-04:002010-07-15T09:40:22.277-04:00Jeff, this post is absolutely hilarious! By far th...Jeff, this post is absolutely hilarious! By far the best thing I've read in weeks, to be certain. I don't know that I have much of a valuable contribution, but mainly want to say: I hear ya! <br /><br />I have only a couple thoughts (which you came very close to mentioning yourself, so you've probably already thought of these things) regarding tips that might mitigate the inconvenience of wearing running shorts <i>and</i> wanting/needing to bring along keys and wallet. Becca apprised me of Nathan brand running products, one of which includes a waistband that is far more fashionable than your average fanny pack that can be used to bring along your personal belongings. Similarly, <a href="http://www.grantwoodtechnology.com/" rel="nofollow">Grantwood Technology</a>, the same company that made my TuneBand for my iPhone makes pouches that can carry keys and wallet that you can strap to your upper arm which cost a mere $10. You might find that to be a practical purchase regardless of what material your shorts are made of. :-)<br /><br />Good luck!Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11621968346093945692noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1179609605244629667.post-23731710877319286112010-05-17T10:44:35.653-04:002010-05-17T10:44:35.653-04:00It doesn't really surprise me, but I, too, wou...It doesn't really surprise me, but I, too, would have expected reality TV to be higher up.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16400555419570849445noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1179609605244629667.post-8676714015328667152010-04-06T15:07:49.981-04:002010-04-06T15:07:49.981-04:00I'd like to read these.I'd like to read these.Acceberhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04147297929391826243noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1179609605244629667.post-77205944255113427772010-04-02T13:58:46.438-04:002010-04-02T13:58:46.438-04:00Hahaha! I love it!Hahaha! I love it!Acceberhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04147297929391826243noreply@blogger.com