From fork-admin@xent.com Tue Sep 24 10:49:36 2002 Return-Path: Delivered-To: yyyy@localhost.example.com Received: from localhost (jalapeno [127.0.0.1]) by jmason.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 19C8B16F03 for ; Tue, 24 Sep 2002 10:49:36 +0100 (IST) Received: from jalapeno [127.0.0.1] by localhost with IMAP (fetchmail-5.9.0) for jm@localhost (single-drop); Tue, 24 Sep 2002 10:49:36 +0100 (IST) Received: from xent.com ([64.161.22.236]) by dogma.slashnull.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g8O41BC20122 for ; Tue, 24 Sep 2002 05:01:11 +0100 Received: from lair.xent.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by xent.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2A305294248; Mon, 23 Sep 2002 20:53:09 -0700 (PDT) Delivered-To: fork@example.com Received: from mail.evergo.net (unknown [206.191.151.2]) by xent.com (Postfix) with SMTP id AC7FB294245 for ; Mon, 23 Sep 2002 20:53:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 4847 invoked from network); 24 Sep 2002 03:56:41 -0000 Received: from dsl.206.191.151.102.evergo.net (HELO JMHALL) (206.191.151.102) by mail.evergo.net with SMTP; 24 Sep 2002 03:56:41 -0000 Reply-To: From: "John Hall" To: "FoRK" Subject: liberal defnitions Message-Id: <001b01c2637e$643836f0$0200a8c0@JMHALL> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-Msmail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.2627 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: X-Mimeole: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Sender: fork-admin@xent.com Errors-To: fork-admin@xent.com X-Beenthere: fork@example.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.11 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Friends of Rohit Khare List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Mon, 23 Sep 2002 20:56:41 -0700 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.7 required=5.0 tests=AWL,IN_REP_TO,KNOWN_MAILING_LIST,QUOTED_EMAIL_TEXT version=2.50-cvs X-Spam-Level: Depends on how much over spending vs. how much (and what type) over regulation. The biggest problem with over regulation is the costs can be invisible. It also has the ability to single out particular people, while over spending spreads the damage more evenly. Rent control would be an example of a regulation solution that is in general worse than spending tons of money on public housing. As for the definition of a liberal being someone who seeks to impose both, I find no fault in that definition whatsoever. The opinion that EITHER we are spending too much OR we have too much regulation is pretty much anathema to liberal politics. Finally, those who argue that there are private replacements for much government regulation are not saying that a state of nature (no private replacements, no government regulation) is better than government regulation itself. And in my experience people who label themselves 'Green' (which does not include everyone who loves trees and thinks smokestacks are ugly) is a watermelon. > -----Original Message----- > From: fork-admin@xent.com [mailto:fork-admin@xent.com] On Behalf Of Geege > Schuman > > funny. i read it as green = red, as in accounting, as in fiscally > irresponsible. which do you think is the worse indictment - > overregulation > or overspending? there are many (dickheads) who buy into the > neo-conservative media's (fox's) definiton of "liberal" as "one who seeks > to > impose both."