Oh boy.

I think it's best to just let your last message sit in the water like
chopped fish in a minnow trap, and see what it attracts.

Fortunately, you have no material effect on anything outside your own home.
:-)

Doug Kanter wrote:

"Dave Hall" wrote in message
...
Mark Browne wrote:

So now you're in the electricity business eh? You know their overhead
costs?

And you? You *do* know this stuff?

I know how most businesses operate. This one is not much different.

Really?
================================================== ===================

OK, Dave. You don't eat fish. How about water. Do you like water? What about
your kids? Here are some bodies of water which supply cities in New York
(all except Tupper Lake, the last in the list below). Lake Ontario's another
one. It provides drinking water to a few million people in NY and Canada.

So what is your point? Do we have a pollution problem? Yes. So what are
you willing to give up to solve it?

Dave

Doug Kanter wrote:

Oh boy.

I think it's best to just let your last message sit in the water like
chopped fish in a minnow trap, and see what it attracts.


Translation: "I cannot offer up any logic to counter the points made, so
I'll just bow out gracefully".


Dave

"Dave Hall" wrote in message
...
Doug Kanter wrote:

Oh boy.

I think it's best to just let your last message sit in the water like
chopped fish in a minnow trap, and see what it attracts.


Translation: "I cannot offer up any logic to counter the points made, so
I'll just bow out gracefully".


Dave



Translation: You are willing to play Russian roulette with the health of
your children and grandchildren so a handful of corporations don't have to
suffer a few years of economic hardship. Before patriotism, before faith to
a deity, before anything else, your responsibility as a father is the most
important thing on earth. By shirking that responsibility, you become the
lowest form of garbage imaginable.

Doug Kanter wrote:

"Dave Hall" wrote in message
...
Doug Kanter wrote:

Oh boy.

I think it's best to just let your last message sit in the water like
chopped fish in a minnow trap, and see what it attracts.


Translation: "I cannot offer up any logic to counter the points made, so
I'll just bow out gracefully".


Dave



Translation: You are willing to play Russian roulette with the health of
your children and grandchildren so a handful of corporations don't have to
suffer a few years of economic hardship. Before patriotism, before faith to
a deity, before anything else, your responsibility as a father is the most
important thing on earth. By shirking that responsibility, you become the
lowest form of garbage imaginable.


And you still haven't answered the basic question of just how much you
are willing to give up to achieve your utopian environment.

My concern for economic hardship has nothing to do with corporations
(although it would fit your agenda to believe that), but rather how the
increased costs will be passed on to the people, many of whom will not
be able to afford it.

Dave

Dave Hall wrote:


My concern for economic hardship has nothing to do with corporations
(although it would fit your agenda to believe that), but rather how the
increased costs will be passed on to the people, many of whom will not
be able to afford it.

So, what you're saying is: our electricity supply system cannot be upgraded (not
because it would reduce corporate profit, although it certainly would, nudge
nudge wink wink) but because it would create economic hardship for poor people.
This is one step away from advocating socializing the power utilities. Careful
Dave, put down the computer and back away....

DSK

DSK wrote:

Dave Hall wrote:


My concern for economic hardship has nothing to do with corporations
(although it would fit your agenda to believe that), but rather how the
increased costs will be passed on to the people, many of whom will not
be able to afford it.

So, what you're saying is: our electricity supply system cannot be upgraded (not
because it would reduce corporate profit, although it certainly would, nudge
nudge wink wink) but because it would create economic hardship for poor people.
This is one step away from advocating socializing the power utilities. Careful
Dave, put down the computer and back away....

That's certainly one conclusion, but not the one I'd advocate. If it
were, I'd have said so. But I don't favor socialism in any form.

Dave

Doug Kanter wrote:

"Dave Hall" wrote in message
...
Doug Kanter wrote:

"Dave Hall" wrote in message
...
Doug Kanter wrote:

Oh boy.

I think it's best to just let your last message sit in the water
like
chopped fish in a minnow trap, and see what it attracts.


Translation: "I cannot offer up any logic to counter the points made,
so
I'll just bow out gracefully".


Dave



Translation: You are willing to play Russian roulette with the health of
your children and grandchildren so a handful of corporations don't have
to
suffer a few years of economic hardship. Before patriotism, before faith
to
a deity, before anything else, your responsibility as a father is the
most
important thing on earth. By shirking that responsibility, you become
the
lowest form of garbage imaginable.


And you still haven't answered the basic question of just how much you
are willing to give up to achieve your utopian environment.

My concern for economic hardship has nothing to do with corporations
(although it would fit your agenda to believe that), but rather how the
increased costs will be passed on to the people, many of whom will not
be able to afford it.

Dave

You would give up the health of your children because you are wedded to the
policies of your president, who just gave a free gift to electric utilities.
You are the lowest form of garbage imaginable. Family values require that
you put your children first, and a complete stranger much further down on
the list.


And you STILL refuse to answer my question, instead attempting to throw
ad-hominem comments at me. How much are YOU willing to give up to
achieve your ideal environment Doug?

Dave

Harry Krause wrote:

Dave Hall wrote:
Doug Kanter wrote:

Oh boy.

I think it's best to just let your last message sit in the water like
chopped fish in a minnow trap, and see what it attracts.


Translation: "I cannot offer up any logic to counter the points made, so
I'll just bow out gracefully".


Dave


No translation needed. Your views are so simple-minded, Dave, they
really need no rebuttal or even comment. I certainly hope you do not
have children.

Coming from the king of simplistic. You responses are so trite and
simple, that you can't even be original. I've run out of fingers
counting the number of times you have made that same, almost exact,
comment. Are you even capable of independent thought?

Dave

"Dave Hall" wrote in message
...


You would give up the health of your children because you are wedded to
the
policies of your president, who just gave a free gift to electric
utilities.
You are the lowest form of garbage imaginable. Family values require
that
you put your children first, and a complete stranger much further down
on
the list.


And you STILL refuse to answer my question, instead attempting to throw
ad-hominem comments at me. How much are YOU willing to give up to
achieve your ideal environment Doug?

Dave



Trash. You are comfortable with letting your children be guinea pigs for
increased pollution, because you have mistaken a monkey president for a
deity. Fathers like you should be dealt with in the most severe fashion. You
are not fit to be called a human or an American.