Question:

Well no shit they "update it." Every year. No shit, genius. I was just making a comment that a $110 "required book" is already out of date.

They’re always out of date. It’s just more obvious this year. If you don’t like that fact, I suggest you not specialize in taxation.

Response:

Well no shit they "update it." Every year. No shit, genius. I was just making a comment that a $110 "required book" is already out of date. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Well, the West Federal Taxation Book, "2004 Edition" lists the standard deduction for married filing jointly as $7950. That’s what it was ~before~ the new tax law revisions.  Probably current when the textbook went to press.  I’m sure there is a disclosure that says in part: "Not responsible for acts of Congress after publication" You’re telling me it’s $9500? Under ~CURRENT~ law, yes.  It’s exactly double the individual standard deduction.  And remember, there are almost 4 months left for Congress to change their minds, and things could change again. It’s TAXES, get used to it or find another profession. — Paul A. Thomas, CPA

Response:

Well no shit they "update it." Every year. No shit, genius. I was just making a comment that a $110 "required book" is already out of date.

And…..for ~some~ strange reason you think anyone here can do diddly about it? I suggest you bitch to your school administration, but first, get a grip and second, have a solution besides "Someone should do something". — Paul A. Thomas, CPA

Response:

Well, the West Federal Taxation Book, "2004 Edition" lists the standard deduction for married filing jointly as $7950. You’re telling me it’s $9500?

Yes.

Response:

Well, the West Federal Taxation Book, "2004 Edition" lists the standard deduction for married filing jointly as $7950.

That’s what it was ~before~ the new tax law revisions.  Probably current when the textbook went to press.  I’m sure there is a disclosure that says in part: "Not responsible for acts of Congress after publication" You’re telling me it’s $9500?

Under ~CURRENT~ law, yes.  It’s exactly double the individual standard deduction.  And remember, there are almost 4 months left for Congress to change their minds, and things could change again. It’s TAXES, get used to it or find another profession. — Paul A. Thomas, CPA

Response:

At least your class actually meets.  My tax class consisted of classroom sessions on a sporadic basis.  Our instructor was a tax attorney/CPA who was bored with teaching introductory tax so he told us to just read the book and review the tax guide.  Then the tests consisted of 33 multiple choice questions that were basically here are the facts, what will the tax liability be in this situation.  I think the highest score on any exam was in the 40s.  But I got my "C" and got on with life. Keep in mind that taxes are NOT accounting.  Unless you are going into a tax specialty most of the tax stuff will apply only to your personal return. On an interesting side note, I am currently working for a tax preparation firm as a manager.  If they only knew that I KNOW NOTHING about taxes and my mentor/advisor is Google. DGG "Can. 12:11 – And Jesus told the Canadians, "Don’t do anything until I come back." – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Had my first class at the university today, i’m a transfer student (Junior) with a major in accounting. My first class of the day was Federal Income Taxes. My other classes are Intermediate Accounting and Cost Accounting. Although I had the Income Tax class at community college last semester, i’m required to take it again because it only transferred as an elective. Truth is… the class covers THE SAME material and uses THE SAME textbook, but the "2004" version. Just as I thought, buying the new book was a waste of money. The only differences are the amounts of the standard deductions. Wow, now the standard deduction is $4750 and $7950 for single and married taxpayers! This is so worth $109! Also, the professor said we will NOT be using tax forms at all, since there is "software" that will do it all for you by just entering in the information. Well, no shit. But understanding tax forms is a necessity, and last semester at community college we worked our way through 1040’s, Schedules A/B, C, D, the child tax credit, earned income credit and the Self Employment Tax form. The knowledge i’ve gained is incredible, there is no substitute for doing actual tax returns from people on actual tax forms. So i’m sitting back and relaxing in this class. The only difference is that he speeds through the material so fast (class is from 830am to 940am, it was originally 8 to 10am but that’s too long I gather) and this course goes a few chapters "deeper" than last semester. But really, I must hand it to my community college teacher. Her class was outstanding. This class, for $20,000 a year, is … lazy. No wonder there are so many accouting problems… no one knows shit.

Response:

Well, the West Federal Taxation Book, "2004 Edition" lists the standard deduction for married filing jointly as $7950. You’re telling me it’s $9500? – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Had my first class at the university today, i’m a transfer student (Junior) with a major in accounting. My first class of the day was Federal Income Taxes. My other classes are Intermediate Accounting and Cost Accounting. Although I had the Income Tax class at community college last semester, i’m required to take it again because it only transferred as an elective. Truth is… the class covers THE SAME material and uses THE SAME textbook, but the "2004" version. Just as I thought, buying the new book was a waste of money. The only differences are the amounts of the standard deductions. Wow, now the standard deduction is $4750 and $7950 for single and married taxpayers! This is so worth $109! I hate to be the one to tell you but the 2003 standard deduction for a married couple filing a joint return is $9,500. <<SNIP For what it’s worth, employers have told me that they value tax research skills more highly in new hires than the ability to fill out forms. I try to strike a balance in the courses I teach between tax compliance (filling out forms) and tax planning (getting ready to make some real money). Good luck. Regards, Bill

Response:

Had my first class at the university today, i’m a transfer student (Junior) with a major in accounting. My first class of the day was Federal Income Taxes. My other classes are Intermediate Accounting and Cost Accounting. Although I had the Income Tax class at community college last semester, i’m required to take it again because it only transferred as an elective. Truth is… the class covers THE SAME material and uses THE SAME textbook, but the "2004" version. Just as I thought, buying the new book was a waste of money. The only differences are the amounts of the standard deductions. Wow, now the standard deduction is $4750 and $7950 for single and married taxpayers! This is so worth $109! Also, the professor said we will NOT be using tax forms at all, since there is "software" that will do it all for you by just entering in the information. Well, no shit. But understanding tax forms is a necessity, and last semester at community college we worked our way through 1040’s, Schedules A/B, C, D, the child tax credit, earned income credit and the Self Employment Tax form. The knowledge i’ve gained is incredible, there is no substitute for doing actual tax returns from people on actual tax forms. So i’m sitting back and relaxing in this class. The only difference is that he speeds through the material so fast (class is from 830am to 940am, it was originally 8 to 10am but that’s too long I gather) and this course goes a few chapters "deeper" than last semester. But really, I must hand it to my community college teacher. Her class was outstanding. This class, for $20,000 a year, is … lazy. No wonder there are so many accouting problems… no one knows shit.

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Had my first class at the university today, i’m a transfer student (Junior) with a major in accounting. My first class of the day was Federal Income Taxes. My other classes are Intermediate Accounting and Cost Accounting. Although I had the Income Tax class at community college last semester, i’m required to take it again because it only transferred as an elective. Truth is… the class covers THE SAME material and uses THE SAME textbook, but the "2004" version. Just as I thought, buying the new book was a waste of money. The only differences are the amounts of the standard deductions. Wow, now the standard deduction is $4750 and $7950 for single and married taxpayers! This is so worth $109! Also, the professor said we will NOT be using tax forms at all, since there is "software" that will do it all for you by just entering in the information. Well, no shit. But understanding tax forms is a necessity, and last semester at community college we worked our way through 1040’s, Schedules A/B, C, D, the child tax credit, earned income credit and the Self Employment Tax form. The knowledge i’ve gained is incredible, there is no substitute for doing actual tax returns from people on actual tax forms. So i’m sitting back and relaxing in this class. The only difference is that he speeds through the material so fast (class is from 830am to 940am, it was originally 8 to 10am but that’s too long I gather) and this course goes a few chapters "deeper" than last semester. But really, I must hand it to my community college teacher. Her class was outstanding. This class, for $20,000 a year, is … lazy. No wonder there are so many accouting problems… no one knows shit.

I hope you get some benefit taking out your frustrations here but I doubt it will do you any good.  The college textbook game has been going on a long time.    your point about doing real tax returns vs. classroom tax learning is very true.

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Had my first class at the university today, i’m a transfer student (Junior) with a major in accounting. My first class of the day was Federal Income Taxes. My other classes are Intermediate Accounting and Cost Accounting. Although I had the Income Tax class at community college last semester, i’m required to take it again because it only transferred as an elective. Truth is… the class covers THE SAME material and uses THE SAME textbook, but the "2004" version. Just as I thought, buying the new book was a waste of money. The only differences are the amounts of the standard deductions. Wow, now the standard deduction is $4750 and $7950 for single and married taxpayers! This is so worth $109!

I hate to be the one to tell you but the 2003 standard deduction for a married couple filing a joint return is $9,500. <<SNIP For what it’s worth, employers have told me that they value tax research skills more highly in new hires than the ability to fill out forms. I try to strike a balance in the courses I teach between tax compliance (filling out forms) and tax planning (getting ready to make some real money). Good luck. Regards, Bill

Response:

Question:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – 2) Recognizing that the DOJ has in fact indicted a piece of paper (an organization, not innocent people and not a ham sandwich), what, in your opinion, prevents the unindicted partners from forming a new firm and continuing in business? In answereing, keep in mind that I not only have a license to practice, I also own a licensed firm. I think this may actually be one of the fundamental problems with why Andersen can’t find a way out of this mess–the Volker proposal, were it to be more than simple window dressing, would require a *radically* different firm from what the current partners and employees are used to. But people don’t generally join and stay in large organizations because they *like* uncertainty and blazing new paths for the business. What you are proposing would involve substantial risk, either from the firm being deemed a simple successor to Andersen (and thus subject to the claims) or from having to operate in a radically different structure. In reality, the only way the partners and employees can get back to "normal" (that is, the practice they were used to and had chosen) is to become part of one of the other four. Alternatively, if they want to take a major risk, there may be more rewards in striking on their own *IF* they personally possess a truly marketable and specialized skill. I believe that, in fact, the conflicts over those issues would make it almost impossible to resolve this with Andersen emerging in any form. In fact, I suspect the partners are now waking up to the fact that unless they leave Andersen, they will never be back in their "comfort zone" for the type of enterprise they want to work in. "No risk, no reward." IMHO Mr. Volcker’s advice to Andersen, if the media have reported it correctly, would make Andersen the only "clean" Big 5 audit firm, at least formally by restriction to only external audit work. Back to the roots: "marines of auditing", "think straight, talk straight", as others have cited here. As you correctly point out, Ed, leopards have always found it difficult to change their spots. Anderson people are no exception.

OK Ed & Lucien, Now that you have sprung my trap, I suppose I need to make a few comments. First, I was merely asking a question; admittedly both leading and loaded, but nevertheless a question.   I was not "proposing" anything.   As you have correctly stated, the unindicted Andersen partners are prevented from going forward in a new vehicle by their own culture and complexity, and also by their own now eroded reputation.  The law does not prevent them from going forward in a new vehicle. While the notion of being deemed a "simple successor" is certainly a concern, I believe it is a workable concern.  "Fair value" would have to be paid for any assets acquired from the predecessor firm, and the individual partners would not be excused from whatever liability they has as partners of the predecessor.  Nevertheless, it serves no-one to destroy the livelihoods of innocent people, and the courts would recognize this. — Jim Hudspeth, CFE, CPA   http://survivalworks.com

Response:

As you have correctly stated, the unindicted Andersen partners are prevented from going forward in a new vehicle by their own culture and complexity, and also by their own now eroded reputation.  The law does not prevent them from going forward in a new vehicle.

I agree fully–the issue is not one of the option being impossible, but one of the option being one that the current partners won’t allow themselves to consider because they are fundamentally not risk takers of the type necessary to jump into the project.  And those that would accept the risk likely would decide it might be best to go it alone. I think we are seeing the ultimate solution being played out in the sale of the tax practice.  Other Big 5 firms will "cherry pick" the partners and staff they want.  The only thing stopping it from happening wholesale right now is the noncompete agreement.  Because, right now, if the Andersen partners voted to release themselves from that agreement, it’s very possible that they might find the bankruptcy court would reinstate the agreements in order to obtain assets for the creditors.

Response:

I guess you were quoting Biddle. I’ve yet to see either of you say Andersen’s top people were guilty of anything other than non-specific "poor judgment."

I have said, numerous times, that they failed their professional obligation to the public and allowed their independence to be impaired.  Short of accusing top management of committing a crime, which I don’t believe happened, I don’t think there are much stronger admonishments that you can make towards a firm of CPAs.   As long as you believe that is the worst they’re guilty of, you won’t understand why these bad things are happening to the firm and you won’t be able to provide effective help in keeping it from happening to another firm.

Bad things are happening to the firm because they allowed a company to misreport their financial position and then had the partner in charge decide to shread documents after he was aware of an SEC investigation.  Looking deeper, their was a lack of monitoring controls.   Chris

Response:

Other Big 5 firms will "cherry pick" the partners and staff they want.  The only thing stopping it from happening wholesale right now is the noncompete agreement.  Because, right now, if the Andersen partners voted to release themselves from that agreement, it’s very possible that they might find the bankruptcy court would reinstate the agreements in order to obtain assets for the creditors.

I can’t see a bankruptcy court reinstating noncompete agreements under present circumstances.  I can see a bankruptcy court assigning monetary values to them and forcing the departing partners to pay to leave. — Jim Hudspeth, CFE, CPA   http://survivalworks.com

Response:

I don’t think there will be too much crow to eat…just at this point, it’s still spec. Tippy

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – As I stated earlier, the media is hype…the media feeds the investigators who feed on the media who….  I am quite sure that people behind the scenes are working with the media for their own purposes, usually politicians.  View with skepticism this article and the earlier ones.  However, the later articles are more likely closer to the truth..but you won’t see any retractions.  Likewise, we generally "know" what the media decides to tell us, skewed though it may be.  This limitations doesn’t stop us from having opinions and discussing the issues, but keep an open mind until the facts are in. We don’t **know** much, but we **believe** a lot based on the articles. Tippy And in this case it doesn’t look like we have long to wait.  The Arizona trial related to BFA starts April 29 and the Houston trial related to Enron starts May 6. If Andersen wins either one of them I’ll be right here chocking down my share of the crow (feathers & all). — Jim Hudspeth, CFE, CPA http://survivalworks.com

Response:

Andersen walked away from a federal offer of "deferred prosecution" that would have lifted the felony indictment and in effect put the firm on probation.

I don’t think the firm has a choice. 1.  The vultures are not going to let them sell any assets if they settle. 2.  They will be barred from practicing in at least a few states if they settle. Some legal specialists said that, given the strength of the Justice Department’s case, turning such an offer down was almost an act of self-destruction. "If you walk away from this attractive a [deal] and the company ultimately fails, its death should be attributed not to murder by the Justice Department but to suicide," said John Coffee, a law professor at Columbia University.

Does this guy have inside information on the case?  Has he ever conducted a jury trial in his life?  I will take the advice over a practicing attorney over some academic any day.  Nice "sound bite" however.   Chris

Response:

<<SNIP So the house investigators have found no evidence that links the document destruction to senior managers in Chicago?  These guys are sniffing up the wrong tree.  They should just call William Brown.

You won’t recognize the existence of a problem outside the specific one of shredding potential evidence. A similar lack of problem recognition by Andersen’s senior management is why those individuals should be out of the profession. Their refusal to do anything effective to solve the problems revealed by a series of audit failures is the reason they and the firm are in the situation they face today. The best that could possibly be said about them is that they are woefully incompetent – so incompetent that they can’t be trusted with any responsibility as auditors. I happened to believe that the best that might be said about them will turn out be much, much better than the truth about them. Blame the media if it makes you feel better. Deny the existence of any real problem inside Andersen. Be prepared for the same thing to happen again.

Response:

I’m really tired of responding to really intellectually dishonest (or intellectually challenged) people who say that if I am not in favor of blowing up Andersen LLP, then I must be in favor of Andersen getting off scot-free, as if those were the only two choices! THOSE ARE NOT THE ONLY CHOICES. It is intellectually dishonest.

I guess you were quoting Biddle. I’ve yet to see either of you say Andersen’s top people were guilty of anything other than non-specific "poor judgment." As long as you believe that is the worst they’re guilty of, you won’t understand why these bad things are happening to the firm and you won’t be able to provide effective help in keeping it from happening to another firm.

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Andersen walked away from a federal offer of "deferred prosecution" that would have lifted the felony indictment and in effect put the firm on probation. I don’t think the firm has a choice. 1.  The vultures are not going to let them sell any assets if they settle. 2.  They will be barred from practicing in at least a few states if they settle. Some legal specialists said that, given the strength of the Justice Department’s case, turning such an offer down was almost an act of self-destruction. "If you walk away from this attractive a [deal] and the company ultimately fails, its death should be [attributed not to murder by the Justice Department but to suicide," said John Coffee, a law professor at Columbia University. Does this guy have inside information on the case?  Has he ever conducted a jury trial in his life?  I will take the advice over a practicing attorney over some academic any day.  Nice "sound bite" however. Chris

I would acknowledge that, as a practical matter, Andersen really has few choices. While I think that "hounds" would be a better descriptor than "vultures", I would acknowledge that Andersen is presently unable to manage the assets in it's possession. I would assert that Andersen will probably be barred in at least a few states regardless of what it does. I would agree that in "real life" I occasionally seek the the advice of a practicing attorney and seldom seek the advice of academics. Having agreed to all that, I would like to ask you a couple of questions. 1) Which "vulture" do you believe has a moral obligation to defer in favor of Andersen?   Keep in mind that some of these "vultures" represent real victims. 2) Recognizing that the DOJ has in fact indicted a piece of paper (an organization, not innocent people and not a ham sandwich), what, in your opinion, prevents the unindicted partners from forming a new firm and continuing in business?  In answereing, keep in mind that I not only have a license to practice, I also own a licensed firm. -- Jim Hudspeth, CFE, CPA   http://survivalworks.com

Response:

I guess you were quoting Biddle. I've yet to see either of you say Andersen's top people were guilty of anything other than non-specific "poor judgment." I have said, numerous times, that they failed their professional obligation to the public and allowed their independence to be impaired.  Short of accusing top management of committing a crime, which I don't believe happened, I don't think there are much stronger admonishments that you can make towards a firm of CPAs.

Do you agree with me, that if that is all they are guilty of, that they should have their certificates yanked so they won't ever have audit responsibility again? As long as you believe that is the worst they're guilty of, you won't understand why these bad things are happening to the firm and you won't be able to provide effective help in keeping it from happening to another firm. Bad things are happening to the firm because they allowed a company to

Bad things are happening to the firm because they allowed several companies to misreport their financial position and then had the partner in charge decide to

misreport their financial positions and results of operations. shread documents after he was aware of an SEC investigation.  Looking deeper, their was a lack of monitoring controls.

Sure. But the Enron audit was not the first example of that lack of control. Not even close to the first. Top Andersen management had ample warning that their house was out of order and they deliberately chose not to remedy the situation. Obligatory back of the hand: You're making progress but you still behave as though you want to believe the Enron blowup was an aberration and that Andersen did not really have serious, systemic problems with the way it ran audits.

Response:

- Hide quoted text -- Show quoted text - 2) Recognizing that the DOJ has in fact indicted a piece of paper (an organization, not innocent people and not a ham sandwich), what, in your opinion, prevents the unindicted partners from forming a new firm and continuing in business? In answereing, keep in mind that I not only have a license to practice, I also own a licensed firm. I think this may actually be one of the fundamental problems with why Andersen can't find a way out of this mess--the Volker proposal, were it to be more than simple window dressing, would require a *radically* different firm from what the current partners and employees are used to. But people don't generally join and stay in large organizations because they *like* uncertainty and blazing new paths for the business. What you are proposing would involve substantial risk, either from the firm being deemed a simple successor to Andersen (and thus subject to the claims) or from having to operate in a radically different structure. In reality, the only way the partners and employees can get back to "normal" (that is, the practice they were used to and had chosen) is to become part of one of the other four. Alternatively, if they want to take a major risk, there may be more rewards in striking on their own *IF* they personally possess a truly marketable and specialized skill. I believe that, in fact, the conflicts over those issues would make it almost impossible to resolve this with Andersen emerging in any form. In fact, I suspect the partners are now waking up to the fact that unless they leave Andersen, they will never be back in their "comfort zone" for the type of enterprise they want to work in.

"No risk, no reward." IMHO Mr. Volcker's advice to Andersen, if the media have reported it correctly, would make Andersen the only "clean" Big 5 audit firm, at least formally by restriction to only external audit work. Back to the roots: "marines of auditing", "think straight, talk straight", as others have cited here. As you correctly point out, Ed, leopards have always found it difficult to change their spots. Anderson people are no exception. A. Lucien Meyers, CIA, CMA -- If you receive this by error, please delete it and inform the sender. PGP key fingerprint=F1C0 D9AE 1B18 1405 4DFA  B4CC 6DC7 FF78 C76E FB15 To Big Brother Echelon from "spook": colonel munitions Nazi Saddam Hussein bomb Mossad assassination Khaddafi

Response:

2) Recognizing that the DOJ has in fact indicted a piece of paper (an organization, not innocent people and not a ham sandwich), what, in your opinion, prevents the unindicted partners from forming a new firm and continuing in business?  In answereing, keep in mind that I not only have a license to practice, I also own a licensed firm.

I think this may actually be one of the fundamental problems with why Andersen can't find a way out of this mess--the Volker proposal, were it to be more than simple window dressing, would require a *radically* different firm from what the current partners and employees are used to.  But people don't generally join and stay in large organizations because they *like* uncertainty and blazing new paths for the business. What you are proposing would involve substantial risk, either from the firm being deemed a simple successor to Andersen (and thus subject to the claims) or from having to operate in a radically different structure.  In reality, the only way the partners and employees can get back to "normal" (that is, the practice they were used to and had chosen) is to become part of one of the other four.  Alternatively, if they want to take a major risk, there may be more rewards in striking on their own *IF* they personally possess a truly marketable and specialized skill. I believe that, in fact, the conflicts over those issues would make it almost impossible to resolve this with Andersen emerging in any form.  In fact, I suspect the partners are now waking up to the fact that unless they leave Andersen, they will never be back in their "comfort zone" for the type of enterprise they want to work in.

Response:

I'm really tired of responding to really intellectually dishonest (or intellectually challenged) people who say that if I am not in favor of blowing up Andersen LLP, then I must be in favor of Andersen getting off scot-free, as if those were the only two choices! THOSE ARE NOT THE ONLY CHOICES.

It is intellectually dishonest. Chris

Response:

The DOJ had a choice - good ones, plenty strict enough to deter - yet they chose bad one which, in addition to punishing indiscriminatly, has the effect of enriching the other Big 5 players who aren't much better than Andersen, but a lot luckier.

Arthur Andersen Drops Negotiations, Prepares to Defend Actions in Court By JONATHAN WEIL, DEVON SPURGEON and CASSELL BRYAN-LOW Staff Reporters of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL <snip Andersen walked away from a federal offer of "deferred prosecution" that would have lifted the felony indictment and in effect put the firm on probation. Some legal specialists said that, given the strength of the Justice Department's case, turning such an offer down was almost an act of self-destruction. "If you walk away from this attractive a [deal] and the company ultimately fails, its death should be attributed not to murder by the Justice Department but to suicide," said John Coffee, a law professor at Columbia University. <snip http://online.wsj.com/article/0,,SB101916035343251920,00.html?mod=us_… (subscription only) Looks like the "choice" was Andersen’s. As to the remaining Big Few – not necessarily luckier – just less willing to play "Russian Roulette" with a full cylinder. — Jim Hudspeth, CFE, CPA   http://survivalworks.com

Response:

Based on what I’ve read of his posts, Biddy doesn’t seem to believe there is any justification for putting "thousands of innocent voters out of work." He is steadfast in his refusal to blame Andersen for Andersen’s problems.

I’m really tired of responding to really intellectually dishonest (or intellectually challenged) people who say that if I am not in favor of blowing up Andersen LLP, then I must be in favor of Andersen getting off scot-free, as if those were the only two choices! THOSE ARE NOT THE ONLY CHOICES. The question is whether it would have been better to limit the governments carnage to the management of Andersen who are ultimately responsible, and the partners running the Enron audit, some of whom might be criminally responsible, rather than nuking the whole firm including innocent men, woman and children? Look, we could have solved the problem with the taliban government by dropping nukes on Afganistan and been done with it quickly. Instead we chose to go after the guilty using methods that limit damage to the innocent. Thats what decent, thinking poeple do, assuming thay have a choice. The DOJ had a choice – good ones, plenty strict enough to deter – yet they chose bad one which, in addition to punishing indiscriminatly, has the effect of enriching the other Big 5 players who aren’t much better than Andersen, but a lot luckier. The fact is now there is little chance the DOJ is gonna do this to another Big 5 firm, regaurdless of any other accounting scandals that come to light. And if the economy doesn’t recover quick enough to hide all the dirty accounting that took place in the past several years, any of you that didn’t think so will see just how much andersen has in common with its other Big brothers.

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – As I stated earlier, the media is hype…the media feeds the investigators who feed on the media who….  I am quite sure that people behind the scenes are working with the media for their own purposes, usually politicians.  View with skepticism this article and the earlier ones.  However, the later articles are more likely closer to the truth..but you won’t see any retractions.  Likewise, we generally "know" what the media decides to tell us, skewed though it may be.  This limitations doesn’t stop us from having opinions and discussing the issues, but keep an open mind until the facts are in. We don’t **know** much, but we **believe** a lot based on the articles. Tippy

And in this case it doesn’t look like we have long to wait.  The Arizona trial related to BFA starts April 29 and the Houston trial related to Enron starts May 6. If Andersen wins either one of them I’ll be right here chocking down my share of the crow (feathers & all). — Jim Hudspeth, CFE, CPA   http://survivalworks.com

Response:

Document destruction limited to a few employees By CHRIS MONDICS Philadelphia Inquirer WASHINGTON — When a federal grand jury indicted Arthur Andersen last month for shredding Enron-related documents, prosecutors painted a portrait of

a firm run //snipped// Investigators for Andersen and congressional committees have assembled evidence showing that the shredding appears to have been organized by David Duncan, the lead Andersen partner on the Enron audit, who pleaded guilty to obstruction So the house investigators have found no evidence that links the document destruction to senior managers in Chicago?  These guys are sniffing up the wrong tree.  They should just call William Brown. Chris

As I stated earlier, the media is hype…the media feeds the investigators who feed on the media who….  I am quite sure that people behind the scenes are working with the media for their own purposes, usually politicians.  View with skepticism this article and the earlier ones.  However, the later articles are more likely closer to the truth..but you won’t see any retractions.  Likewise, we generally "know" what the media decides to tell us, skewed though it may be.  This limitations doesn’t stop us from having opinions and discussing the issues, but keep an open mind until the facts are in. We don’t **know** much, but we **believe** a lot based on the articles. Tippy

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Actually I think that DOJ , given Pheonix, Waste Management, Enron, et al is correct in applying the "death penalty" here. Crucial distinction: The fine, if found guilty, is only around $500,000; little more than a wrist slap to a firm of Andersen’s size. The death sentence comes from the court of public opinion. A bit more than that. A felony conviction means loss of SEC audits. In many (most? all?) states, firms convicted of felonies lose their privilege of practicing.

For the sake of argument, I’ll concede both points. However, to the best of my knowledge, there is no law standing in the way of unconvicted partners forming a new firm and being back in business the next day. — Jim Hudspeth, CFE, CPA   http://survivalworks.com

Response:

Actually I think that DOJ , given Pheonix, Waste Management, Enron, et al is correct in applying the "death penalty" here.

Based on what I’ve read of his posts, Biddy doesn’t seem to believe there is any justification for putting "thousands of innocent voters out of work." He is steadfast in his refusal to blame Andersen for Andersen’s problems. Does anyone think after AA is systematically dismembered in criminal , civil and the court od public opinion that the excesses won’t be toned down a bit? or already are?

Toned down for how long without real oversight by an independent body with the power to subpoena and to impose sanctions? That is the purpose of punishment yes – deterence.

On this one, both punishment and deterrence are sufficient alone. easy2000

Response:

Actually I think that DOJ , given Pheonix, Waste Management, Enron, et al is correct in applying the "death penalty" here. Crucial distinction: The fine, if found guilty, is only around $500,000; little more than a wrist slap to a firm of Andersen’s size. The death sentence comes from the court of public opinion.

A bit more than that. A felony conviction means loss of SEC audits. In many (most? all?) states, firms convicted of felonies lose their privilege of practicing. easy2000

Response:

Actually I think that DOJ , given Pheonix, Waste Management, Enron, et al is correct in applying the "death penalty" here.

Crucial distinction: The fine, if found guilty, is only around $500,000; little more than a wrist slap to a firm of Andersen’s size. The death sentence comes from the court of public opinion. — Jim Hudspeth, CFE, CPA   http://survivalworks.com

Response:

Actually I think that DOJ , given Pheonix, Waste Management, Enron, et al is correct in applying the "death penalty" here. Does anyone think after AA is systematically dismembered in criminal , civil and the court od public opinion that the excesses won’t be toned down a bit? or already are? That is the purpose of punishment yes – deterence.

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – The DOJ’s choice of action in this matter is hard to understand in a way that puts them in a decent light.  They had the opportunity to solve the problem at Andersen once and for all, by forcing management changes at the firm in exchange for not persuing criminal charges against the firm. This probrably should have been done by the SEC earlier (not to be too critical of an angency which is overworked, understaffed and underpaid), but Andersen was ready to take the medicine without a fight. The government could have even reserved the right to persue criminal scalps of any individuals they could prove commited crimes.  Instead of all that, they choose to put Andersen out of business and thousands of innocent VOTERS out of work. Its defies rational explaination.

Response:

The DOJ’s choice of action in this matter is hard to understand in a way that puts them in a decent light.  They had the opportunity to solve the problem at Andersen once and for all, by forcing management changes at the firm in exchange for not persuing criminal charges against the firm. This probrably should have been done by the SEC earlier (not to be too critical of an angency which is overworked, understaffed and underpaid), but Andersen was ready to take the medicine without a fight. The government could have even reserved the right to persue criminal scalps of any individuals they could prove commited crimes.  Instead of all that, they choose to put Andersen out of business and thousands of innocent VOTERS out of work. Its defies rational explaination.

Response:

So the house investigators have found no evidence that links the document destruction to senior managers in Chicago?  These guys are sniffing up the wrong tree.  They should just call William Brown. Chris

In March of 1993 I submitted the following letter to Accounting Today. It was published. March 21, 1993 The Editor ACCOUNTING TODAY 425 Park Ave. New York, NY  10022 Your coverage of the discussion related to the Price Waterhouse vs. Standard Chartered proceeding is fascinating. There really was a time when the leadership of the accounting profession actually stood on a foundation of integrity and independence,and was guided by the sure knowledge that we are all judged by the clients we choose to serve. Times have changed. The elite of this profession have traded integrity and independence for greed and spin control, and are guided in their choice of clients by the sure knowledge that some can write bigger checks than others. The progeny of their choices have come home. Now they come to us for succor.  Judging by the results of your poll (3 to 1 against PW), there are few suckers here. PW’s soiled laundry is on the public line.  They would do well to wash it and tuck it away.  With a little cleaning up, a little medicine, and a little quiet time they should be able to recover.  There is, however, no recovery in denial. Sincerely, Jim Hudspeth While I have no way of knowing if PW cleaned up it’s act after March of 1993, I do know that they shut down their smoke and spin machines.  As of the last published WSJ count, PwC had picked up 44 of the 166 former Andersen clients that went to the remaining 4 "Big Few" firms. At this point smoke and spin work against Andersen, not for it. Andersen’s soiled laundry is on the public line.  Andersen would do well to wash it and tuck it away.  With a little cleaning up, a little medicine, and a little quiet time Andersen might be able to survive.  There is, however, no survival in denial, at least not in this case. Jim Hudspeth

Response:

Document destruction limited to a few employees By CHRIS MONDICS Philadelphia Inquirer WASHINGTON — When a federal grand jury indicted Arthur Andersen last month for shredding Enron-related documents, prosecutors painted a portrait of a firm run amok. Andersen employees, including senior officials, destroyed hundreds of thousands of documents and e-mail messages in offices around the country and as far as London, they said. But in the weeks since, a more complex picture has emerged showing the document destruction by Andersen to be more limited than prosecutors suggested. According to several accounts, the document destruction was limited to a relative handful of partners and staff in the Houston office and other Andersen employees involved in Enron audits. The distinction is important because by indicting the 85,000-employee firm, rather than a handful of people involved in the incident, the prosecutors may have insured Andersen’s extinction. Now, as Andersen and Justice officials negotiate a potential legal settlement, some critics are saying the department went too far, putting the company at risk. "Unless the government has unquestionable evidence that this was a practice throughout the whole firm … they are wrong to indict the whole company," said Tom Donohue, head of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, adding that he has seen no such evidence. "People are going to suffer as a result of this. Who’s next? General Motors? IBM?" Michael Chertoff, the chief of the Justice Department’s criminal division, declined to comment. But a careful reading of the indictment, along with probes by congressional investigators and by Andersen itself, suggest the document shredding was limited largely to Houston and a few other offices handling Enron work. Andersen’s own internal probe, conducted by the Davis, Polk & Wardwell law firm, concluded that while Andersen employees in Houston destroyed an unusually large volume of documents, other Andersen officials stepped in to preserve documents that might figure into a pending probe by the Securities and Exchange Commission. Investigators with the House Energy and Commerce Committee’s oversight and investigations committee, meantime, say they have found no evidence that the document destruction involved any senior management at the Chicago headquarters. Moreover, when Andersen’s internal probe discovered the extent of the shredding at Houston, Andersen was the first to report the destruction to authorities. But the Justice Department declined repeated requests that it focus on individuals involved in the shredding, not the entire firm. Investigators for Andersen and congressional committees have assembled evidence showing that the shredding appears to have been organized by David Duncan, the lead Andersen partner on the Enron audit, who pleaded guilty to obstruction So the house investigators have found no evidence that links the document destruction to senior managers in Chicago?  These guys are sniffing up the wrong tree.  They should just call William Brown. Chris

Response:

Question:

French accounting organization, Conseil Superieur de l’Ordre des Experts-Comptables, has joined the United States and other international bodies in support of the American Institute of Certified Public Accountant’s proposed global business credential, currently dubbed "XYZ."  The organization represents nearly 18,000 accountants in France. Just recently the accounting organizations of Italy joined the initiative. Other countries supporting the global credential include Australia, Canada, and New Zealand. http://www.accountingweb.com/cgi-bin/item.cgi?id=58508 — Jim Hudspeth, CFE, CPA http://survivalworks.com Washington, USA

Response:

Instead of XYZ, why not IBA, for international business advisor. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – French accounting organization, Conseil Superieur de l’Ordre des Experts-Comptables, has joined the United States and other international bodies in support of the American Institute of Certified Public Accountant’s proposed global business credential, currently dubbed "XYZ."  The organization represents nearly 18,000 accountants in France. Just recently the accounting organizations of Italy joined the initiative. Other countries supporting the global credential include Australia, Canada, and New Zealand. http://www.accountingweb.com/cgi-bin/item.cgi?id=58508 — Jim Hudspeth, CFE, CPA http://survivalworks.com Washington, USA

Response:

Instead of XYZ, why not IBA, for international business advisor.

Sure sounds better than "Cognitor". Why don’t you propose it to the AICPA? — Jim Hudspeth, CFE, CPA http://survivalworks.com Washington, USA

Response:

The French like it – a good reason to oppose it !

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – French accounting organization, Conseil Superieur de l’Ordre des Experts-Comptables, has joined the United States and other international bodies in support of the American Institute of Certified Public Accountant’s proposed global business credential, currently dubbed "XYZ."  The organization represents nearly 18,000 accountants in France. Just recently the accounting organizations of Italy joined the initiative. Other countries supporting the global credential include Australia, Canada, and New Zealand. http://www.accountingweb.com/cgi-bin/item.cgi?id=58508 — Jim Hudspeth, CFE, CPA http://survivalworks.com Washington, USA

Response:

There are only 18,000 accountants represented by this French org?

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – The French like it – a good reason to oppose it ! French accounting organization, Conseil Superieur de l’Ordre des Experts-Comptables, has joined the United States and other international bodies in support of the American Institute of Certified Public Accountant’s proposed global business credential, currently dubbed "XYZ."  The organization represents nearly 18,000 accountants in France. Just recently the accounting organizations of Italy joined the initiative. Other countries supporting the global credential include Australia, Canada, and New Zealand. http://www.accountingweb.com/cgi-bin/item.cgi?id=58508 — Jim Hudspeth, CFE, CPA http://survivalworks.com Washington, USA

Response:

Question:

Hi Group: A manufacturing company makes custom products for various customers. During the last month of their fiscal year, they completed an significant order for a customer who asked the company "not" to ship the goods until they had an opportunity to inspect a few units. The company shipped the customer a few units in that month and the customer advised the company that they wanted to make some "changes" to the product.  The company made the changes to the product during the first month of the new fiscal year. Can the company reports as a sale the products that were made and held for the customer before the customer requested the changes?  Or is the sale reported in the new fiscal year along with the additional sales resulting from the revision to the sales order? Does the original product (before the customer changes) meet the criteria for reporting a sale in the earlier fiscal year? If it does or doesn’t, please explain what the sales criteria is (that is, what specific tests have to be met to record a sale)? One final point: the company does not use the percentage of completion method of accounting for books or tax. I look forward to reading your comments on this matter. Regards, Al Gershen Grants Pass, Oregon, USA and thru ICQ # 12342782

Response:

Somewhere in the sales contract for this order should be a condition, that the good can not be shipped until the customer approves the order. If this the case you can not ship the completed order until this condition is met. Therefore no sale.  Sales are normally recognized based on the transfer of title (shipping triggers the transfer of title). The total cost of the order represents "inventory" at year-end, either work in progress or finished goods, depending on what modifications need to be done in the next fiscal year, and the "additional" cost of these changes. Percentage of completion only applies to long-term contract. Additional questions please post. Francis P. Caliva Jr., CPA

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Hi Group: A manufacturing company makes custom products for various customers. During the last month of their fiscal year, they completed an significant order for a customer who asked the company "not" to ship the goods until they had an opportunity to inspect a few units. The company shipped the customer a few units in that month and the customer advised the company that they wanted to make some "changes" to the product.  The company made the changes to the product during the first month of the new fiscal year. Can the company reports as a sale the products that were made and held for the customer before the customer requested the changes?  Or is the sale reported in the new fiscal year along with the additional sales resulting from the revision to the sales order? Does the original product (before the customer changes) meet the criteria for reporting a sale in the earlier fiscal year? If it does or doesn’t, please explain what the sales criteria is (that is, what specific tests have to be met to record a sale)? One final point: the company does not use the percentage of completion method of accounting for books or tax. I look forward to reading your comments on this matter. Regards, Al Gershen Grants Pass, Oregon, USA and thru ICQ # 12342782

Response:

In my opinion – It’s a question that calls for the experienced professional opinion of a licensed public accountant in possession of all relevant facts of the specific situation. Is this a hypothetical question, or are you in a dispute with your accountant?

btv.net… Hi Group: A manufacturing company makes custom products

for various customers. During the last month of their fiscal year, they completed an significant order for a customer who asked the

company "not" to ship the goods until they had an opportunity to inspect a few units. The company shipped the customer a few units in that month and the customer advised the company that they wanted to

make some "changes" to the product.  The company made the changes to

the product during the first month of the new fiscal year. Can the company reports as a sale the products

that were made and held for the customer before the customer requested

the changes?  Or is the sale reported in the new fiscal year along with

the additional sales resulting from the revision to the sales order? Does the original product (before the customer changes) meet the criteria for reporting a sale in the earlier fiscal year? If it does or doesn’t, please explain what the

sales criteria is (that is, what specific tests have to be met to record a sale)? One final point: the company does not use the

percentage of completion – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – method of accounting for books or tax. I look forward to reading your comments on this matter. Regards, Al Gershen Grants Pass, Oregon, USA and thru ICQ # 12342782

Response:

In this instance, the company completed the product per the original sales contract. The goods were done and being stored by the company at the request of the customer.  In essence, title of the goods belonged to the customer who asked the company to retain the goods until they had a chance to review them.

I think that this is what you need to look at. At what point did title pass to the customer? Were the goods inspected by the customer in the first fiscal year? What language does the original contract have? — Brad Crockett Duncan BC Canada                           -o) members.home.net/canbooks

Response:

Hi Francis P. Caliva Jr., CPA: Thank you for your reply to my question. In this instance, the company completed the product per the original sales contract. The goods were done and being stored by the company at the request of the customer.  In essence, title of the goods belonged to the customer who asked the company to retain the goods until they had a chance to review them. When the customer completed its review, it requested that the company make some changes to the product.  The company did these changes in the next fiscal year and the goods were shipped out to the customer, again after the customer reviewed them. The company believes that a valid sale of the original unchanged goods occurred in the prior fiscal year and it wants to record that sale.  It will record a subsequent sale relating to the change order in the following fiscal year. I wish I had access to a Montgomery’s "Auditing" book because it shows the criteria for recording a sale.  There are also accounting standards issued by the FASB & AICPA (in effect before the FASB) that probably discuss the criteria for recording a sale under different circumstances. I would like to present the company with the pros and cons of treating the original order as a sale in the previous fiscal year. Can you please follow-up again on your comments and let me know if you have reconsidered your position in light of the additional information I have provided above. I look forward to your following Usenet posting. Regards, Al Gershen Grants Pass, Oregon, USA and thru ICQ # 12342782 ——Your 1/27/00 Posting Reply to my Question—— Group: alt.accounting (treyboy) Re: Sales Reporting Cut-off Question   Somewhere in the sales contract for this order should be a condition, that the good can not be shipped until the customer approves the order. If this the case you can not ship the completed order until this condition is met. Therefore no sale. Sales are normally recognized based on the transfer of title (shipping triggers the transfer of title). The total cost of the order represents "inventory" at year-end, either work in progress or finished goods, depending on what modifications need to be done in the next fiscal year, and the "additional" cost of these changes. Percentage of completion only applies to long-term contract. Additional questions please post. Francis P. Caliva Jr., CPA Regards, Al Gershen Grants Pass, Oregon, USA and thru ICQ # 12342782

Response:

Question:

We are going to buy either Peachtree 2000, Business Works Accounting, or Cougar Mountain Accounting.  What are the options for integrationg inventory bar coding for these packages?  Hardware/software recommendations for the bar coding would also be helpful. Thanks

Response:

We are going to buy either Peachtree 2000, Business Works Accounting, or Cougar Mountain Accounting.  What are the options for integrationg inventory bar coding for these packages?  Hardware/software recommendations for the bar coding would also be helpful. Thanks

Buy PC Magazine – look in back for bar code hardware/software suppliers.   LB

Response:

Based upon experience of a year ago, I would be very careful on Peachtree 2000. It has difficulties with bar codes and inventories. Look at BW or Cougar (or Red Wing which we resell). Luck,  Dana To reply, please remove NOSPAM from the address Visit our web site at http://www.tailored-computing.com

Response:

Question:

So what if eternity gets boring?  We can always die if we get tired of life, but it’s a bit harder to come back if you get tired of death.

That’s what the suicide option is for: if you want to end your life at, say, 1040 years of age, you have the moral-and-legal right to do so. — Bryan Justus http://www.localgroup.net Freedom, power, prosperity, romance Before you buy.

Response:

So what if eternity gets boring?  We can always die if we get tired of life, but it’s a bit harder to come back if you get tired of death. That’s what the suicide option is for: if you want to end your life at, say, 1040 years of age, you have the moral-and-legal right to do so.

That’s exactly what I meant.  I’m not sure about the *legal* right (these days at least), but as long as I’m not taking anyone out with me when I go I consider it my choice regardless of the law.  :) -IdentityCrisis

Response:

sorry to cut into this discussion, but isn’t homo sapiens the same as human beings? will – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – He was referring to homo sapiens, not human beings, IMO. If you have some kind of nano-clone machine to replicate tissues implanted somewhere, you could theoretically keep on going like a werewolf,

Response:

sorry to cut into this discussion, but isn’t homo sapiens the same as human beings?

Yes, I always thought so. Unless you include Neandertals, Cromagnons, and other close relatives in the definition of "human being". I suppose if we end up with like cloaning machines or imortality or something, the two might diverge… He was referring to homo sapiens, not human beings, IMO. If you have some kind of nano-clone machine to replicate tissues implanted somewhere, you could theoretically keep on going like a werewolf,

– Visit Sailor Squasher’s Games Page for GURPS, Quake 1&2, and more!   http://www.magma.ca/~esmirle/

Response:

sorry to cut into this discussion, but isn’t homo sapiens the same as human beings?

Current human beings are, scientifically, "Homo Sapiens Sapiens". "Homo Sapiens" are our ancestors.

Response:

Crosspost to the Taoism group eliminated.  If the other groups want to be removed, please let me know. What about the implication that to be immortal you will trade your soul to the devil?  The Faust myth is all about this, too.

If it says "your soul must be shipped C.O.D. to Satan within thirty working days" anywhere in the fine print when I sign up for the procedure, I’ll think twice.  Otherwise, I’ve not traded anything of a spiritual nature.  And as I chose the agnostic’s path a long time ago, spiritual matters don’t affect my decision-making process anyway. But I’ll definitely read the fine print first, if it makes you feel any better.  Negative assumptions would include the message you tell yourself that you are inferior as a human being and need repair.

…And this is incorrect?  Humans can *always* be improved, whether naturally by exercise, surgically by the correct of physical flaws (like poor eyesight), emotionally through friendships, or mentally by expanding their education.  To say that you are good enough the way you are is a sign of self-confidence, but to say that you cannot possibly be improved upon is a sign of megalomania and supreme arrogance. Please explain why someone living today, who manages to still be alive billions of years from now, would necessarily forget who his mother was? In _Brave New World_ the clones referred to birth mothering in tittering laughter and were horrified by the thought.

You are citing a work of fiction as proof of something you portray as scientific fact.  I can cite Star Wars’ stormtroopers as "proof" that all bad guys in uniform are terrible shots; that doesn’t make it so. Hard evidence, please. Useless as an appendix, what would keep mother birthing important enough to remember after adulthood, much less multiple lifetimes?

1) Becoming immortal does not mean that the influence your parents (or anybody else) had on you will suddenly be erased.  It can still be just as important a factor in your psychological make-up as it was before, *especially* if your mother is immortal as well and is still telling you to eat your vegetables at 1,031 years of age. 2) Cracking the secrets of gene-splicing and immortality does not necessarily mean that "mother birthing" will become obsolete.  You can argue that once we’ve figured all this stuff out test-tubes will be able to provide better nuturance than a woman’s body can *at present…*  But I can respond that that’s one of the first things about the human race to be upgraded to ensure the continued survival of the species, just in case those test-tubes aren’t always around. 3) Immortality is only an issue once you’re grown; future generations are not likely to spring fully-grown from the womb, and even if they do there’s still a learning process involved.  Someone’s still gotta raise the little tykes, and the parents are likely to still be the best choice.  Culture shock, in the beginning, would be a tough nut to crack, IMO.

It always is.  But if we lacked the capacity as a species to overcome it (however painfully), we would never have gotten around to incorperating neat things like fire and the wheel into our society. Then the need to support your existence with alternate means than family

I’m not sure I see your chain of logic here.  Support my *personal* existance with alternate means than family?  Many people make their own living without *needing* help of family members; that’s not going to suddenly change as a result of acquiring immortality.   suggests that the state takes over with controls like free sex, drugs, and machines that provide therepy.

This seems to have no connection to the first half of your sentance; controls for *what?*  Inability to support themselves?  A welfare system and a better job market are what helps to alleviate those problems. Sex, drugs and therapy would just draw money away from those things, treating the symptoms instead of the desease. You would be alone and afraid, in a world you made.

Why?  Immortality won’t stop me from making friends, and with my worries of old age and all related problems gone I’d actually have a few *less* things to fear. Evolution would probably raise its head again in some punishing way.

The laws of nature are not sentient, vindictive forces; they are mindless processes which we’ve proven our ability to harness or circumvent every time we’ve developed a new technology, from fire to the pentium processer.  Granted many of our inventions can do as much harm as good, but that’s because of the way humans (who *are* sentient, vindictive forces) use them, not because mother nature takes the whole thing personally. let the state be dad,

See my earlier comment; as long as there are new children being born, parenthood is unlikely to become obsolete. Controls are necessary to prevent your ego structure from flying apart.

Beg pardon?  My ego structure is holding together just fine, thank you very much, thanks to the miracles of duct tape.  I see no reason why that should change by my ceasing to age. The state automatically compartmentalizes you automatons into beehive like cells where you work for the hive.

There are many people, myself included, who have very little tolerance for being "compartmentalized" *now,* even though we know that, being mortal, we’ll only have to put with it for so long.  You think we’ll become more tolerant when we know we might have to live like that *forever?* Not to mention that many of the people running "the state" are going to want immortality as well, so they’re hardly likely to alter the system to condemn themselves to an eternity of mindless drudgery (at least, no more so than they are now). Alien bees who are different because they are cloned or naturally born would be detected and eliminated, for the safety of the hive.

Got news for you pal.  People have been hating and killing others for being differant throughout all of human history.  Funny how many differant drums are still out there for people to march to… no brothers or sisters, Again, people who have brothers and sisters *now*, and manage to become immortal, will continue to have brothers and sisters (assuming they also benefit from immortalist technology) for the rest of eternity. Why are you missing that, and where are you coming up with these notions? Sounds like an Olympic set of relatives you have in mind. Mortals used to like pretending they are demi-gods, too, but philosophers of the rainbow, like Nietzche, think that the gods are dead and man is superman. This is an old notion, older than alchemy, older than Lazarus.

Again, presumption without evidence.  You have no idea what his relatives are like.  And how exactly did you jump from "immortals will be soulless, government-controled drones" to "immortals will attempt to play god?" It’s a tragedy when man attempts to defy the gods and gets slapped down.

And rather exhilerating when he gets away with it.  Who are the "gods" in question here? The forces of nature?  Remember, they’re mindless and don’t hold grudges.  The actual gods of Olympus, as in Zeus and Athena? Let me remind you that you’re trying to convince agnostics and aitheists here as well. A better plot is to allow man, the marvel, to work out his own destiny, but a lot of awe and humility.

"Plot?!?"  We’re discussing the real-world ramifications of clinical immortality here, not the writing of pulp fiction!  As for awe and humilty, have you ever stopped to consider that all our attempts to improve ourselves and our technology are *proof* of those qualities? After all, what better way to show humility than to admit you can do more and do it better?  What better way to show awe for the powers of nature than to want to harness them in *order* to do more and do it better? <snip My guess is that unisex would be the model in your brave new world.

Actually once we crack the secrets of genetics anything, or rather any *form,* is going to be fair game.  We might not even be uni*species* for very long, so I don’t think a lack of variety is going to be a problem. And don’t forget that the scientists who develope the technology, the doctors who administer it, the policy-makers who control it and the citizenry that get changed by it all happen to *like* sex.  It may stick around for a lot longer than you think. use drugs for any problems.

Again, presumption without evidence.  There are people whose lives revolve around drugs, yes.  But then again there are also people like me who take nothing stronger than caffeine and the occasional vitamin suppliment, and refuse aspirin even in the face of considerable pain. Once again you are assuming that immortality will change that. What sort of drugs are YOU on? Natural highs, except I don’t know what’s in the jug.  Maybe a genie?

Hmm…  No, I’m thinking something hallucinagenic. <snip Human beings are people who walk the walk like natives, identify with the earth, the tribe, the many-stages of life;

So astronauts are non-human? <snip Does this mean I’m not a "human being" in your book? Screw you. You screw yourself.  See what I told you about beehive behavior?

And once again you contradict yourself.  By refuting you he was asserting himself, and self-assertion is *not* the hallmark of mindless drones.  That’s like accusing me of being a vegetarian for refusing to eat vegetables. and die, but have long memories, are replicated through their children. Nice going – you’ve just dehumanized every human being who ever died childless. Dieing childless as a human being would be better than living forever as a borg.

Setting aside your belief that we will all switch to "mindless zombie" mode upon recieving our life-span upgrades, who said … read more »

Response:

The urgency of mortality breeds innovation.  Without innovation, we will never advance technologically.  This means we shall never discover the means to defeat entropy and the cooling universe

OK……The entropic process ultimately makes individuals mortal anyway; therefore their minds will, when this process approaches, be applied toward fighting it  (assuming that it can be fought). Why do you see death as *necessary*  instead of only *unavoidable*?  And why do you call the chance of human immortality "horrible?"

Response:

    Especially this particular batch of xpost is pretty obvious begun by some ratchethead with nuisance intent. What topic could be relevant to all the above apt or not?     Oh well….. I’m trying to make myself pay better attention to the headers. I’ve done my part of perpetuating some crap for sake of not even looking at what I respond to. – If I knew which group you were posting I would cut the others. – I’m in the neo-tech one right now and don’t even know what it is. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I plead guilty for not erasing the crossposts that were on the original, if that’s what happened.  I was assuming that posting to "the group" as opposed to "all" eliminated the problem, but I guess not. The point is, I suppose, that cross-posting tends to invite same, possibly resulting in the kind of mass threads we now have. I wonder if there is the phenomena of a critical mass cross-posting flame war? I don’t know but that some of it is welcome, though, when invited by an APT grover. My apologies. bookburn     Other than giving some troll his jollies in lieu of getting laid, what is the use of this crossposting? <snip Before you buy.

Response:

I plead guilty for not erasing the crossposts that were on the original, if that’s what happened.  I was assuming that posting to "the group" as opposed to "all" eliminated the problem, but I guess not. The point is, I suppose, that cross-posting tends to invite same, possibly resulting in the kind of mass threads we now have. I wonder if there is the phenomena of a critical mass cross-posting flame war? I don’t know but that some of it is welcome, though, when invited by an APT grover. My apologies. bookburn     Other than giving some troll his jollies in lieu of getting laid, what is the use of this crossposting?

<snip Before you buy.

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – "The first immortal human beings are probably living among us today. You might be one of them." Ben Bova, Immortality, Avon Books, 1998, page 3. Of course this is a horrible and self-defeating possibility.  The urgency of mortality breeds innovation.  Without innovation, we will never advance technologically.  This means we shall never discover the means to defeat entropy and the cooling universe will eventually destroy our "immortal" coils.  Only by remaining mortal as individuals does humanity have any chance of itself being immortal. BTW, what’s that advantage worth?

    This has nothing to do with Taoism. Could you please refrain from crossposting it.

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – "The first immortal human beings are probably living among us today. You might be one of them." Ben Bova, Immortality, Avon Books, 1998, page 3. Of course this is a horrible and self-defeating possibility.  The urgency of mortality breeds innovation.  Without innovation, we will never advance technologically.  This means we shall never discover the means to defeat entropy and the cooling universe will eventually destroy our "immortal" coils.  Only by remaining mortal as individuals does humanity have any chance of itself being immortal. BTW, what’s that advantage worth?

    It is off topic in alt.philosophy.taoism     And it is obviously a troll crosspost if you would consider the header.

Response:

"The first immortal human beings are probably living among us today. You might be one of them." Ben Bova, Immortality, Avon Books, 1998, page 3.

Of course this is a horrible and self-defeating possibility.  The urgency of mortality breeds innovation.  Without innovation, we will never advance technologically.  This means we shall never discover the means to defeat entropy and the cooling universe will eventually destroy our "immortal" coils.  Only by remaining mortal as individuals does humanity have any chance of itself being immortal. BTW, what’s that advantage worth?

Response:

    Other than giving some troll his jollies in lieu of getting laid, what is the use of this crossposting? – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – "The first immortal human beings are probably living among us today. You might be one of them." Ben Bova, Immortality, Avon Books, 1998, page 3. He was referring to homo sapiens, not human beings, IMO. If you have some kind of nano-clone machine to replicate tissues implanted somewhere, you could theoretically keep on going like a werewolf, Excuse me, like a *werewolf*? Nice way to imply that technologically achieved immortality must be "bad", by comparing it to a horror myth about curses that make people occasionally turn into monsters and kill. Nano self-repair doesn’t imply *any* of those negative assumptions. What about the implication that to be immortal you will trade your soul to the devil?  The Faust myth is all about this, too.  Negative assumptions would include the message you tell yourself that you are inferior as a human being and need repair. replicate the clone machine, too.  Do without some of the mamalian features, such as birth mothers Please explain why someone living today, who manages to still be alive billions of years from now, would necessarily forget who his mother was? In _Brave New World_ the clones referred to birth mothering in tittering laughter and were horrified by the thought.  Useless as an appendix, what would keep mother birthing important enough to remember after adulthood, much less multiple lifetimes? and family structure, Our family structure is a biological and memetic construct which evolved to fit the way we live and reproduce. If we start living and reproducing differently, then duh, the current family structure should adapt to the new norms. Why is that necessarily a bad thing? I doubt you can come up with any reason other than nostalgia. Culture shock, in the beginning, would be a tough nut to crack, IMO. Then the need to support your existence with alternate means than family suggests that the state takes over with controls like free sex, drugs, and machines that provide therepy.  You would be alone and afraid, in a world you made.  Evolution would probably raise its head again in some punishing way. let the state be dad, Wait a minute. How did you make the leap from nano self-repair implants to state child-rearing? Anyone who’s living now, and manages to stay alive perpetually, will continue to be a person who was raised in the original manner. And since we all agree that the state should not be in charge of child rearing, those of us who become immortal will be free to remain opposed to that for all eternity. Controls are necessary to prevent your ego structure from flying apart. The state automatically compartmentalizes you automatons into beehive like cells where you work for the hive.  Alien bees who are different because they are cloned or naturally born would be detected and eliminated, for the safety of the hive. no brothers or sisters, Again, people who have brothers and sisters *now*, and manage to become immortal, will continue to have brothers and sisters (assuming they also benefit from immortalist technology) for the rest of eternity. Why are you missing that, and where are you coming up with these notions? Sounds like an Olympic set of relatives you have in mind.  Mortals used to like pretending they are demi-gods, too, but philosophers of the rainbow, like Nietzche, think that the gods are dead and man is superman. This is an old notion, older than alchemy, older than Lazarus.  It’s a tragedy when man attempts to defy the gods and gets slapped down.  A better plot is to allow man, the marvel, to work out his own destiny, but a lot of awe and humility. sex only as a recreational diversion, Why is that bad? Of course there’s more to sex than that *now*, but that’s because we’re mortals who have to churn out more human beings to make up for the number who die each year. The longer each generation lasts, the less we need to make more. Are you seriously suggesting that human beings should refrain from extending their own life-spans just so that sex will remain crucial? You are into a very interesting sub-topic here, about the philosophy of sex and Taoism and sex.  This goes beyond the mysteries of the ancient wo dancing masters, IMO.  Perhaps there is more to sex than meets the . . . well, at least more than your statistical accounting can represent.  My guess is that unisex would be the model in your brave new world. use drugs for any problems. What sort of drugs are YOU on? Natural highs, except I don’t know what’s in the jug.  Maybe a genie? Huxley previewed all this 70 years ago in _Brave New World_. But was he *right* about the implications? What if he was just pessimistic and confused? Interesting you ask.  He came from an illustrious family of scientists, one of them being the Huxley who was Darwin’s "bulldog." Very much not confused.  Lived in Hollywood at a time America was most optimistic.  If you haven’t seen the movie or preferably read the book, you could benefit from checking out some of the theory. Human beings are people who walk the walk like natives, identify with the earth, the tribe, the many-stages of life; What do you mean, "identify with"? I am aware that I’m on the earth, but I’m also aware that it’s just one planet out of countless trillions. I don’t have a "tribe", and I don’t think that tribalism is a particularly helpful attitude. I go through the "many stages of life", just like everybody else, but so what? Does this mean I’m not a "human being" in your book? Screw you. You screw yourself.  See what I told you about beehive behavior? and die, but have long memories, are replicated through their children. Nice going – you’ve just dehumanized every human being who ever died childless. Dieing childless as a human being would be better than living forever as a borg. Somehow, imperfect as it is, humans get stronger and better overcoming problems. Sure. But only until they keel over dead. Dying is, itself, a problem that we are getting better at overcoming. In your version of cryogenics do you freeze the whole body or just the brain? Human beings laugh, dance, and sing; have mind, heart Why would immortality change any of these things? Well, you don’t seem too happy about the prospects of perpetual non- ageing.  Sure it won’t get a bit tedious?  But maybe you could select different programs to be different ages, like playing the piano. and spirit, If all you mean is that we have drives and goals and so on, I agree. Immortality wouldn’t change that. If you mean we’ve got ghostly somethings that waft away to happy-land when we die, then no, I don’t agree with that. recognize kindred beings as relatives; like Taoists, huh. Apart from pulling the rug out from under a bunch of religions that rely on fear of death in order to make converts, why would immortality prevent us from recognizing "kindred beings"? To spite those other drones seems like the wrong reason to get a lobotomy.  Why not get a life? Passing the firewater, bookburn So you’re drinking? Good, I was afraid that you might have actually *meant* some of the nonsense you just wrote. -Jeff Dee P.S.: Did I mention how much your handle disturbs me? Which books did you have in mind? I started using a handle because my name, Don Cameron, is common in my neck of the woods and we get each others mail, etc.  "bookburn" actually refers to a favorite book, Bradbury’s sci-fi novel, _Ferenheit 451_ which is the temperature at which paper burns.  Its about a future world in which people continue outside cities as exmigrants who memorize books because books are contraband. — "It is as morally bad not to care whether a thing is true or not, so long as it makes you feel good, as it is not to care how you got your money as long as you have got it." -Edmund Way Teale, "Circle of the Seasons", 1950 Teale is probably a poor but honest nut. Regards, bookburn Before you buy.

Response:

alt.philosophy.taoism trimmed at the request – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – "The first immortal human beings are probably living among us today. You might be one of them." Ben Bova, Immortality, Avon Books, 1998, page 3. He was referring to homo sapiens, not human beings, IMO. If you have some kind of nano-clone machine to replicate tissues implanted somewhere, you could theoretically keep on going like a werewolf, Excuse me, like a *werewolf*? Nice way to imply that technologically achieved immortality must be "bad", by comparing it to a horror myth about curses that make people occasionally turn into monsters and kill. Nano self-repair doesn’t imply *any* of those negative assumptions. What about the implication that to be immortal you will trade your soul to the devil?

There’s no such thing as a "soul". The Faust myth is all about this, too.  Negative assumptions would include the message you tell yourself that you are inferior as a human being and need repair.

Inferior to what? Yes, I can imagine ways to improve myself. If you can’t, then you’re a megalomaniac. replicate the clone machine, too.  Do without some of the mamalian features, such as birth mothers Please explain why someone living today, who manages to still be alive billions of years from now, would necessarily forget who his mother was? In _Brave New World_ the clones referred to birth mothering in tittering laughter and were horrified by the thought.

So what? How do you know that anything said in that book corresponds to the way things would actually turn out? and family structure, Our family structure is a biological and memetic construct which evolved to fit the way we live and reproduce. If we start living and reproducing differently, then duh, the current family structure should adapt to the new norms. Why is that necessarily a bad thing? I doubt you can come up with any reason other than nostalgia.  Culture shock, in the beginning, would be a tough nut to crack, IMO.

It always is. But that nut gets cracked, and we move on. Every time. Then the need to support your existence with alternate means than family suggests that the state takes over with controls like free sex, drugs, and machines that provide therepy.

Why the state, other than that you’re paranoid? You would be alone and afraid,

HUH? Why would being immortal make you "alone"? If anything, it would tend to lead to an increase in population. in a world you made.

The point being…? Evolution would probably raise its head again in some punishing way.

Evolution doesn’t "punish". It’s a blind mechanistic process. Besides, humaity has proven that anything evolution can do, we can do a thousand times faster with technology. let the state be dad, Wait a minute. How did you make the leap from nano self-repair implants to state child-rearing? Anyone who’s living now, and manages to stay alive perpetually, will continue to be a person who was raised in the original manner. And since we all agree that the state should not be in charge of child rearing, those of us who become immortal will be free to remain opposed to that for all eternity. Controls are necessary to prevent your ego structure from flying apart.

HUH? The state automatically compartmentalizes you automatons into beehive like cells where you work for the hive.

HUH? Alien bees who are different because they are cloned or naturally born would be detected and eliminated, for the safety of the hive.

HUH? How do you know any of this? no brothers or sisters, Again, people who have brothers and sisters *now*, and manage to become immortal, will continue to have brothers and sisters (assuming they also benefit from immortalist technology) for the rest of eternity. Why are you missing that, and where are you coming up with these notions? Sounds like an Olympic set of relatives you have in mind.  Mortals used to like pretending they are demi-gods, too, but philosophers of the rainbow, like Nietzche, think that the gods are dead and man is superman. This is an old notion, older than alchemy, older than Lazarus.  It’s a tragedy when man attempts to defy the gods and gets slapped down.

What gods? A better plot is to allow man, the marvel, to work out his own destiny, but a lot of awe and humility.

Awe of *what* and humility in the face of *what*? I have plenty of awe of the natural universe, but there’s no point in venerating it because the universe lacks any conscious ability to give a damn. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – sex only as a recreational diversion, Why is that bad? Of course there’s more to sex than that *now*, but that’s because we’re mortals who have to churn out more human beings to make up for the number who die each year. The longer each generation lasts, the less we need to make more. Are you seriously suggesting that human beings should refrain from extending their own life-spans just so that sex will remain crucial? You are into a very interesting sub-topic here, about the philosophy of sex and Taoism and sex.  This goes beyond the mysteries of the ancient wo dancing masters, IMO.  Perhaps there is more to sex than meets the . . . well, at least more than your statistical accounting can represent.

Or perhaps not. If you think you can show that there *is* more to it than that, go right ahead. My guess is that unisex would be the model in your brave new world.

So? use drugs for any problems. What sort of drugs are YOU on? Natural highs, except I don’t know what’s in the jug.  Maybe a genie?

You’re a loonie. Huxley previewed all this 70 years ago in _Brave New World_. But was he *right* about the implications? What if he was just pessimistic and confused? Interesting you ask.  He came from an illustrious family of scientists, one of them being the Huxley who was Darwin’s "bulldog." Very much not confused. Lived in Hollywood at a time America was most optimistic.

What has any of that got to do with the accuracy of his predictions about the future? If you haven’t seen the movie or preferably read the book, you could benefit from checking out some of the theory.

I’ve seen them. They’re crap. Human beings are people who walk the walk like natives, identify with the earth, the tribe, the many-stages of life; What do you mean, "identify with"? I am aware that I’m on the earth, but I’m also aware that it’s just one planet out of countless trillions. I don’t have a "tribe", and I don’t think that tribalism is a particularly helpful attitude. I go through the "many stages of life", just like everybody else, but so what? Does this mean I’m not a "human being" in your book? Screw you. You screw yourself.

Hey dipshit. YOU were the one who started in insulting everyone who didn’t fit in with your little formula about what constitutes a human being. Screw YOU. See what I told you about beehive behavior?

Nope. and die, but have long memories, are replicated through their children. Nice going – you’ve just dehumanized every human being who ever died childless. Dieing childless as a human being would be better than living forever as a borg.

Why? So far all you’ve offered in defense of your opinion is old science fiction and hand-waving. WHY would "dying childless as a human being would be better than living forever as a borg"? How do YOU know what it would be like to be a "borg"? I’ll let you in on a little secret. You’re ALREADY a machine. The only difference between the machine you are now and the "borg" you’d rather die than become is that you’re the product of the blind machinations of evolution, while a borg would be the product of intentional design. Evolution couldn’t care less what you think about the body you’ve got. It didn’t intentionally create these bodies for *our* sake – it churned them out blindly in response to selection pressures in the environment, all because when it did that our genes could adapt and keep the process going. That’s IT. There is NO reason to assume that we could not do a better job at designing ourselves, as soon as we have the technology to make that feasable. Somehow, imperfect as it is, humans get stronger and better overcoming problems. Sure. But only until they keel over dead. Dying is, itself, a problem that we are getting better at overcoming. In your version of cryogenics do you freeze the whole body or just the brain?

It’s spelled "cryonics". And it’s not a question of "my" version: as long as you freeze *at least* the head, the brain (which generates what we call our consciousness) might theoretically be repaired. Human beings laugh, dance, and sing; have mind, heart Why would immortality change any of these things? Well, you don’t seem too happy about the prospects of perpetual non- ageing.

HUH? Where the hell did you get that idea? Sure it won’t get a bit tedious?

Why would it? But maybe you could select different programs to be different ages, like playing the piano.

Huh? – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – and spirit, If all you mean is that we have drives and goals and so on, I agree. Immortality wouldn’t change that. If you mean we’ve got ghostly somethings that waft away to happy-land when we die, then no, I don’t agree with that. recognize kindred beings as relatives; like

… read more »

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – "The first immortal human beings are probably living among us today. You might be one of them." Ben Bova, Immortality, Avon Books, 1998, page 3. He was referring to homo sapiens, not human beings, IMO. If you have some kind of nano-clone machine to replicate tissues implanted somewhere, you could theoretically keep on going like a werewolf, Excuse me, like a *werewolf*? Nice way to imply that technologically achieved immortality must be "bad", by comparing it to a horror myth about curses that make people occasionally turn into monsters and kill. Nano self-repair doesn’t imply *any* of those negative assumptions.

What about the implication that to be immortal you will trade your soul to the devil?  The Faust myth is all about this, too.  Negative assumptions would include the message you tell yourself that you are inferior as a human being and need repair. replicate the clone machine, too.  Do without some of the mamalian features, such as birth mothers Please explain why someone living today, who manages to still be alive billions of years from now, would necessarily forget who his mother was?

In _Brave New World_ the clones referred to birth mothering in tittering laughter and were horrified by the thought.  Useless as an appendix, what would keep mother birthing important enough to remember after adulthood, much less multiple lifetimes? and family structure, Our family structure is a biological and memetic construct which evolved to fit the way we live and reproduce. If we start living and reproducing differently, then duh, the current family structure should adapt to the new norms.

Why is that necessarily a bad thing? I doubt you can come up with any reason other than nostalgia.

 Culture shock, in the beginning, would be a tough nut to crack, IMO. Then the need to support your existence with alternate means than family suggests that the state takes over with controls like free sex, drugs, and machines that provide therepy.  You would be alone and afraid, in a world you made.  Evolution would probably raise its head again in some punishing way. let the state be dad, Wait a minute. How did you make the leap from nano self-repair implants to state child-rearing? Anyone who’s living now, and manages to stay alive perpetually, will continue to be a person who was raised in the original manner. And since we all agree that the state should not be in charge of child rearing, those of us who become immortal will be free to remain opposed to that for all eternity.

Controls are necessary to prevent your ego structure from flying apart. The state automatically compartmentalizes you automatons into beehive like cells where you work for the hive.  Alien bees who are different because they are cloned or naturally born would be detected and eliminated, for the safety of the hive. no brothers or sisters, Again, people who have brothers and sisters *now*, and manage to become immortal, will continue to have brothers and sisters (assuming they also benefit from immortalist technology) for the rest of eternity. Why are you missing that, and where are you coming up with these notions?

Sounds like an Olympic set of relatives you have in mind.  Mortals used to like pretending they are demi-gods, too, but philosophers of the rainbow, like Nietzche, think that the gods are dead and man is superman. This is an old notion, older than alchemy, older than Lazarus.  It’s a tragedy when man attempts to defy the gods and gets slapped down.  A better plot is to allow man, the marvel, to work out his own destiny, but a lot of awe and humility. sex only as a recreational diversion, Why is that bad? Of course there’s more to sex than that *now*, but that’s because we’re mortals who have to churn out more human beings to make up for the number who die each year. The longer each generation lasts, the less we need to make more. Are you seriously suggesting that human beings should refrain from extending their own life-spans just so that sex will remain crucial?

You are into a very interesting sub-topic here, about the philosophy of sex and Taoism and sex.  This goes beyond the mysteries of the ancient wo dancing masters, IMO.  Perhaps there is more to sex than meets the . . . well, at least more than your statistical accounting can represent.  My guess is that unisex would be the model in your brave new world. use drugs for any problems. What sort of drugs are YOU on?

Natural highs, except I don’t know what’s in the jug.  Maybe a genie? Huxley previewed all this 70 years ago in _Brave New World_. But was he *right* about the implications? What if he was just pessimistic and confused?

Interesting you ask.  He came from an illustrious family of scientists, one of them being the Huxley who was Darwin’s "bulldog." Very much not confused.  Lived in Hollywood at a time America was most optimistic.  If you haven’t seen the movie or preferably read the book, you could benefit from checking out some of the theory. Human beings are people who walk the walk like natives, identify with the earth, the tribe, the many-stages of life; What do you mean, "identify with"? I am aware that I’m on the earth, but I’m also aware that it’s just one planet out of countless trillions. I don’t have a "tribe", and I don’t think that tribalism is a particularly helpful attitude. I go through the "many stages of life", just like everybody else, but so what? Does this mean I’m not a "human being" in your book? Screw you.

You screw yourself.  See what I told you about beehive behavior? and die, but have long memories, are replicated through their children. Nice going – you’ve just dehumanized every human being who ever died childless.

Dieing childless as a human being would be better than living forever as a borg. Somehow, imperfect as it is, humans get stronger and better overcoming problems. Sure. But only until they keel over dead. Dying is, itself, a problem that we are getting better at overcoming.

In your version of cryogenics do you freeze the whole body or just the brain? Human beings laugh, dance, and sing; have mind, heart Why would immortality change any of these things?

Well, you don’t seem too happy about the prospects of perpetual non- ageing.  Sure it won’t get a bit tedious?  But maybe you could select different programs to be different ages, like playing the piano. and spirit, If all you mean is that we have drives and goals and so on, I agree. Immortality wouldn’t change that. If you mean we’ve got ghostly somethings that waft away to happy-land when we die, then no, I don’t agree with that. recognize kindred beings as relatives; like Taoists, huh. Apart from pulling the rug out from under a bunch of religions that rely on fear of death in order to make converts, why would immortality prevent us from recognizing "kindred beings"?

To spite those other drones seems like the wrong reason to get a lobotomy.  Why not get a life? Passing the firewater, bookburn So you’re drinking? Good, I was afraid that you might have actually *meant* some of the nonsense you just wrote. -Jeff Dee P.S.: Did I mention how much your handle disturbs me? Which books did you have in mind?

I started using a handle because my name, Don Cameron, is common in my neck of the woods and we get each others mail, etc.  "bookburn" actually refers to a favorite book, Bradbury’s sci-fi novel, _Ferenheit 451_ which is the temperature at which paper burns.  Its about a future world in which people continue outside cities as exmigrants who memorize books because books are contraband. — "It is as morally bad not to care whether a thing is true or not, so long as it makes you feel good, as it is not to care how you got your money as long as you have got it." -Edmund Way Teale, "Circle of the Seasons", 1950

Teale is probably a poor but honest nut. Regards, bookburn

Before you buy.

Response:

Ah. Check the groups this has been cross-posted to. Explains a bit.

Yeah, dildos that usually have nothing to say, tend to crosspost what they do say, so they can impose their dribble on as many people as possible. They think that because they have an interest in all the groups they post to, that everyone in those groups should read what they have to say.

Response:

Yeah. Because humans have always died, dying is necessary for us to be human. If humans ever colonize other planets and stop "identifying with the earth", they’ll be relegated to being mere homo sapiens. And because humans could never breathe underwater, using SCUBA gear actually makes you an inhuman fiend. Little known fact.

This explains a lot about my sister, the dive instructor from Hell.         – Ian — Marriage, n: The state or condition of a community consisting of a master, a mistress, and two slaves, making, in all, two. — Ambrose Bierce http://www.ccs.neu.edu/home/ian SSBB Diplomatic Corps; Boston, Massachusetts

Response:

Please leave alt.philosophy.taoism out of the newsgroups when you post to this thread.

Response:

Ah. Check the groups this has been cross-posted to. Explains a bit. Yeah, dildos that usually have nothing to say, tend to crosspost what they do say, so they can impose their dribble on as many people as possible. They think that because they have an interest in all the groups they post to, that everyone in those groups should read what they have to say.

You is correct.  I shouldn’t have replied to this guy. Ritchie

Response:

: : Human beings are people who walk the walk like natives, identify with : : the earth, the tribe, the many-stages of life; and die, but have long : : memories, are replicated through their children.  Somehow, imperfect as : : it is, humans get stronger and better overcoming problems. Human beings : : laugh, dance, and sing; have mind, heart and spirit, recognize kindred : : beings as relatives; like Taoists, huh. : : : : Passing the firewater, bookburn : : I don’t what you intended by this post, but I’m happy to be _merely_ Homo : : sapiens.  I can’t wait to decant my first clone. : : Ritchie : Yeah. Because humans have always died, dying is necessary for us to be : human. If humans ever colonize other planets and stop "identifying with : the earth", they’ll be relegated to being mere homo sapiens. And because : humans could never breathe underwater, using SCUBA gear actually makes you : an inhuman fiend. Little known fact. Ah. Check the groups this has been cross-posted to. Explains a bit.

Response:

"The first immortal human beings are probably living among us today. You might be one of them." Ben Bova, Immortality, Avon Books, 1998, page 3. He was referring to homo sapiens, not human beings, IMO. If you have some kind of nano-clone machine to replicate tissues implanted somewhere, you could theoretically keep on going like a werewolf,

Excuse me, like a *werewolf*? Nice way to imply that technologically achieved immortality must be "bad", by comparing it to a horror myth about curses that make people occasionally turn into monsters and kill. Nano self-repair doesn’t imply *any* of those negative assumptions. replicate the clone machine, too.  Do without some of the mamalian features, such as birth mothers

Please explain why someone living today, who manages to still be alive billions of years from now, would necessarily forget who his mother was? and family structure,

Our family structure is a biological and memetic construct which evolved to fit the way we live and reproduce. If we start living and reproducing differently, then duh, the current family structure should adapt to the new norms. Why is that necessarily a bad thing? I doubt you can come up with any reason other than nostalgia. let the state be dad,

Wait a minute. How did you make the leap from nano self-repair implants to state child-rearing? Anyone who’s living now, and manages to stay alive perpetually, will continue to be a person who was raised in the original manner. And since we all agree that the state should not be in charge of child rearing, those of us who become immortal will be free to remain opposed to that for all eternity. no brothers or sisters,

Again, people who have brothers and sisters *now*, and manage to become immortal, will continue to have brothers and sisters (assuming they also benefit from immortalist technology) for the rest of eternity. Why are you missing that, and where are you coming up with these notions? sex only as a recreational diversion,

Why is that bad? Of course there’s more to sex than that *now*, but that’s because we’re mortals who have to churn out more human beings to make up for the number who die each year. The longer each generation lasts, the less we need to make more. Are you seriously suggesting that human beings should refrain from extending their own life-spans just so that sex will remain crucial? use drugs for any problems.

What sort of drugs are YOU on? Huxley previewed all this 70 years ago in _Brave New World_.

But was he *right* about the implications? What if he was just pessimistic and confused? Human beings are people who walk the walk like natives, identify with the earth, the tribe, the many-stages of life;

What do you mean, "identify with"? I am aware that I’m on the earth, but I’m also aware that it’s just one planet out of countless trillions. I don’t have a "tribe", and I don’t think that tribalism is a particularly helpful attitude. I go through the "many stages of life", just like everybody else, but so what? Does this mean I’m not a "human being" in your book? Screw you. and die, but have long memories, are replicated through their children.

Nice going – you’ve just dehumanized every human being who ever died childless. Somehow, imperfect as it is, humans get stronger and better overcoming problems.

Sure. But only until they keel over dead. Dying is, itself, a problem that we are getting better at overcoming. Human beings laugh, dance, and sing; have mind, heart

Why would immortality change any of these things? and spirit,

If all you mean is that we have drives and goals and so on, I agree. Immortality wouldn’t change that. If you mean we’ve got ghostly somethings that waft away to happy-land when we die, then no, I don’t agree with that. recognize kindred beings as relatives; like Taoists, huh.

Apart from pulling the rug out from under a bunch of religions that rely on fear of death in order to make converts, why would immortality prevent us from recognizing "kindred beings"? Passing the firewater, bookburn

So you’re drinking? Good, I was afraid that you might have actually *meant* some of the nonsense you just wrote. -Jeff Dee P.S.: Did I mention how much your handle disturbs me? Which books did you have in mind? — "It is as morally bad not to care whether a thing is true or not, so long as it makes you feel good, as it is not to care how you got your money as long as you have got it." -Edmund Way Teale, "Circle of the Seasons", 1950     * * * Knight of the BAAWA since 10/26/99 * * *

Response:

"The first immortal human beings are probably living among us today. You might be one of them." Ben Bova, Immortality, Avon Books, 1998, page 3. — Bryan Justus http://www.localgroup.net Freedom, power, prosperity, romance Before you buy.

Response:

"The first immortal human beings are probably living among us today. You might be one of them." Ben Bova, Immortality, Avon Books, 1998, page 3. — Bryan Justus

He was referring to homo sapiens, not human beings, IMO.  If you have some kind of nano-clone machine to replicate tissues implanted somewhere, you could theoretically keep on going like a werewolf, replicate the clone machine, too.  Do without some of the mamalian features, such as birth mothers and family structure, let the state be dad, no brothers or sisters, sex only as a recreational diversion, use drugs for any problems.  Huxley previewed all this 70 years ago in _Brave New World_. Human beings are people who walk the walk like natives, identify with the earth, the tribe, the many-stages of life; and die, but have long memories, are replicated through their children.  Somehow, imperfect as it is, humans get stronger and better overcoming problems. Human beings laugh, dance, and sing; have mind, heart and spirit, recognize kindred beings as relatives; like Taoists, huh. Passing the firewater, bookburn Before you buy.

Response:

Human beings are people who walk the walk like natives, identify with the earth, the tribe, the many-stages of life; and die, but have long memories, are replicated through their children.  Somehow, imperfect as it is, humans get stronger and better overcoming problems. Human beings laugh, dance, and sing; have mind, heart and spirit, recognize kindred beings as relatives; like Taoists, huh. Passing the firewater, bookburn

I don’t what you intended by this post, but I’m happy to be _merely_ Homo sapiens.  I can’t wait to decant my first clone. Ritchie

Response:

: Human beings are people who walk the walk like natives, identify with : the earth, the tribe, the many-stages of life; and die, but have long : memories, are replicated through their children.  Somehow, imperfect as : it is, humans get stronger and better overcoming problems. Human beings : laugh, dance, and sing; have mind, heart and spirit, recognize kindred : beings as relatives; like Taoists, huh. : : Passing the firewater, bookburn : I don’t what you intended by this post, but I’m happy to be _merely_ Homo : sapiens.  I can’t wait to decant my first clone. : Ritchie Yeah. Because humans have always died, dying is necessary for us to be human. If humans ever colonize other planets and stop "identifying with the earth", they’ll be relegated to being mere homo sapiens. And because humans could never breathe underwater, using SCUBA gear actually makes you an inhuman fiend. Little known fact.

Response:

Question:

Using the Java in my head and the limited resources from my village, I would speculate the selling price (in a range perhaps) of a car (or unit) is determined long before the car is made.  Probably before construction on the assembly plant is made.  I mean why would anyone go through all the effort if they didnt know they were going to make money in the process?  Your shareholders would also have to be convinced as well.  I believe each car a company makes is targeted for a certain group of buyers.  Say a Prelude is targeted for the thirty-something crowd with incomes of $X.  So you would have to determine how many cars, the price, how much to produce the car, and how much profit per unit, to make the whole mess worth while. Just speculating, I believe all this research/market analysis is done to create a baseline price (or perhaps a range) per unit.  And yes, I believe they do pay people to do just that.  Of course this is all just speculation on my part.  To get the real deal, I would have to go somewhere to confirm my assumptions.  Maybe a market expert, or perhaps posting the question on a newsgroup?  Since I don’t personally know any market experts or CEO’s of major auto manufacturers, I would think a newsgroup would be a good place to ask.  Which leads me back to the very instance of posting this in the first place.

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I hope this was your way of saying "I dont know" because thats just about all my simple mind got from your complex response.  :) There is no such thing as a Stupid Question?????:   Wrong! Frankly Speaking I get a little perturbed when the Village Idiots start posting their questions.  Excuse Me! Alright your making me feel guilty! When you walk into a Retail Outlet, you know from the Get-Go that their markup is at least 30%.. For autodealers, that markup is 3%, 5% , 8% and more depending( this would be the MSRP)……upon popularity of the vehicle or positioning of the vehicle, ….Expensive High-End Luxury Models are the Big Money Makers for both the dealer and mfg. Now who makes the MSRP up???? is it the accounting dept? is it the Corparate Crew??? Take a pick, its not really worth worrying about….just be secure in the Knowledge that a Job title does not specifically exist for this postion. Now you may say what exactly determines the 3%, 5%, or 8% the Competition, Positioning, strength of sales, it all comes down to the people who know the business that they are in. Of course, the problem with me answering this question is that with a little Java in your head , and a bit of imaginative effort, you could have come up with the same answer, negating the very instance of you asking this question in the first place. –And trust me on this one, YOU WONT GET A BETTER ANSWER IN THIS NEWSGROUP. Natural Born Cynic — Mathematician

Response:

Good Job, I knew you could do it! – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Using the Java in my head and the limited resources from my village, I would speculate the selling price (in a range perhaps) of a car (or unit) is determined long before the car is made.  Probably before construction on the assembly plant is made.  I mean why would anyone go through all the effort if they didnt know they were going to make money in the process?  Your shareholders would also have to be convinced as well.  I believe each car a company makes is targeted for a certain group of buyers.  Say a Prelude is targeted for the thirty-something crowd with incomes of $X.  So you would have to determine how many cars, the price, how much to produce the car, and how much profit per unit, to make the whole mess worth while. Just speculating, I believe all this research/market analysis is done to create a baseline price (or perhaps a range) per unit.  And yes, I believe they do pay people to do just that.  Of course this is all just speculation on my part.  To get the real deal, I would have to go somewhere to confirm my assumptions.  Maybe a market expert, or perhaps posting the question on a newsgroup?  Since I don’t personally know any market experts or CEO’s of major auto manufacturers, I would think a newsgroup would be a good place to ask.  Which leads me back to the very instance of posting this in the first place. I hope this was your way of saying "I dont know" because thats just about all my simple mind got from your complex response.  :) There is no such thing as a Stupid Question?????:   Wrong! Frankly Speaking I get a little perturbed when the Village Idiots start posting their questions.  Excuse Me! Alright your making me feel guilty! When you walk into a Retail Outlet, you know from the Get-Go that their markup is at least 30%.. For autodealers, that markup is 3%, 5% , 8% and more depending( this would be the MSRP)……upon popularity of the vehicle or positioning of the vehicle, ….Expensive High-End Luxury Models are the Big Money Makers for both the dealer and mfg. Now who makes the MSRP up???? is it the accounting dept? is it the Corparate Crew??? Take a pick, its not really worth worrying about….just be secure in the Knowledge that a Job title does not specifically exist for this postion. Now you may say what exactly determines the 3%, 5%, or 8% the Competition, Positioning, strength of sales, it all comes down to the people who know the business that they are in. Of course, the problem with me answering this question is that with a little Java in your head , and a bit of imaginative effort, you could have come up with the same answer, negating the very instance of you asking this question in the first place. –And trust me on this one, YOU WONT GET A BETTER ANSWER IN THIS NEWSGROUP. Natural Born Cynic — Mathematician

Response:

Doesn’t it have something to do with MR and MC?

Response:

Just curious.  After all this debate about the dealer markup over MSRP on the S2000, just where does the manufacturer come up with this number?  Is this a function of cost of production with profit added?  Or is it decided by a bunch of market types who attempt to get a price people will pay for the car?

You seem to have alot of time on your hands? I think it doesnt matter who or why or how. Unless your simpleminded and this is about all your capable of grasping.

Response:

Just curious.  After all this debate about the dealer markup over MSRP on the S2000, just where does the manufacturer come up with this number?  Is this a function of cost of production with profit added?  Or is it decided by a bunch of market types who attempt to get a price people will pay for the car?

Response:

I hope this was your way of saying "I dont know" because thats just about all my simple mind got from your complex response.  :)

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Just curious.  After all this debate about the dealer markup over MSRP on the S2000, just where does the manufacturer come up with this number?  Is this a function of cost of production with profit added?  Or is it decided by a bunch of market types who attempt to get a price people will pay for the car? You seem to have alot of time on your hands? I think it doesnt matter who or why or how. Unless your simpleminded and this is about all your capable of grasping.

Response:

I hope this was your way of saying "I dont know" because thats just about all my simple mind got from your complex response.  :)

There is no such thing as a Stupid Question?????:   Wrong! Frankly Speaking I get a little perturbed when the Village Idiots start posting their questions.  Excuse Me!

Response:

I hope this was your way of saying "I dont know" because thats just about all my simple mind got from your complex response.  :) There is no such thing as a Stupid Question?????:   Wrong! Frankly Speaking I get a little perturbed when the Village Idiots start posting their questions.  Excuse Me!

Alright your making me feel guilty! When you walk into a Retail Outlet, you know from the Get-Go that their markup is at least 30%.. For autodealers, that markup is 3%, 5% , 8% and more depending( this would be the MSRP)……upon popularity of the vehicle or positioning of the vehicle, ….Expensive High-End Luxury Models are the Big Money Makers for both the dealer and mfg. Now who makes the MSRP up???? is it the accounting dept? is it the Corparate Crew??? Take a pick, its not really worth worrying about….just be secure in the Knowledge that a Job title does not specifically exist for this postion. Now you may say what exactly determines the 3%, 5%, or 8% the Competition, Positioning, strength of sales, it all comes down to the people who know the business that they are in. Of course, the problem with me answering this question is that with a little Java in your head , and a bit of imaginative effort, you could have come up with the same answer, negating the very instance of you asking this question in the first place. –And trust me on this one, YOU WONT GET A BETTER ANSWER IN THIS NEWSGROUP. Natural Born Cynic  – Mathematician

Response:

Question:

Ok, I have an opportunity to pick paint colors. Currently, I have Black and Black Yellow Fade and Deep Blue I need colors for my track, cyclocross, road and time trial frames. So , gimme some feedback.

Response:

Ok, I have an opportunity to pick paint colors. Currently, I have Black and Black Yellow Fade and Deep Blue I need colors for my track, cyclocross, road and time trial frames. So , gimme some feedback.

All right, you asked for it!   There’s no accounting for tastes (or lack thereof), so I’ll admit that I like hot pink and electric blue.  Hey, gee whiz, those are the colors of my bike!!   Of course, red and black make an extremely classy combination as well. Fades are alway very trick. YMMV. Tri-Baby                                      _                                   –    o      ’             –  __o       –    </_  `     ‘         –    <         – __/    /o_         – (()) (())        -  / "REAL Triathletes don’t draft." *** Ironman Canada 1997 – 13:04:09 *** http://www-leland.stanford.edu/~brooksie        

Response:

i vote for orange. it’s the sun worshipper in me! makes me think swimming, biking … oh, you get the point. hey tricia, remember that sid & marty kroft show "electra-woman and dyno girl"? the hot pink/electric blue thing has definitely passed the test of time. what is "YMMV"? scott – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – All right, you asked for it! There’s no accounting for tastes (or lack thereof), so I’ll admit that I like hot pink and electric blue.  Hey, gee whiz, those are the colors of my bike!! Of course, red and black make an extremely classy combination as well. Fades are alway very trick. YMMV. Tri-Baby                                     _                                  -    o     ‘             –  __o       –    </_ `     ‘         –    <         – __/   /o_         – (()) (())        -  / "REAL Triathletes don’t draft." *** Ironman Canada 1997 – 13:04:09 *** http://www-leland.stanford.edu/~brooksie

Response:

Man… you’re asking a bunch of triathletes about colours ??? These are people who will happily run in fluorescent-anything. — MB. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Ok, I have an opportunity to pick paint colors. Currently, I have Black and Black Yellow Fade and Deep Blue I need colors for my track, cyclocross, road and time trial frames. So , gimme some feedback.

Response:

hey tricia, remember that sid & marty kroft show "electra-woman and dyno girl"? the hot pink/electric blue thing has definitely passed the test of time.

tee hee hee hee…. what is "YMMV"?

‘Net shorthand for "Your mileage may vary", which in this case is equal to saying, "Hey, it works for me, but might not be ‘the thing’ for you." Tri-Baby                                      _                                   –    o      ’             –  __o       –    </_  `     ‘         –    <         – __/    /o_         – (()) (())        -  / "REAL Triathletes don’t draft." *** Ironman Canada 1997 – 13:04:09 *** http://www-leland.stanford.edu/~brooksie        

Response:

cheers Sam

DITTO!  Remember – purple was the colour for royalty! Alison

Response:

Ok, I have an opportunity to pick paint colors. Currently, I have Black and Black Yellow Fade and Deep Blue

Go with the Fire engine red. Very flashy "Iron Pete" Priolo IMC’96 – 10:36:37    IMC’97 – 10:42:53 ‘98 – Gulf Coast Tri, IMC – confirmed ‘98 – Buffalo Springs Lake Tri, Blackwater Eagleman – unconfirmed

Response:

Ok, I have an opportunity to pick paint colors. Currently, I have Black and Black Yellow Fade and Deep Blue I need colors for my track, cyclocross, road and time trial frames. So , gimme some feedback.

‘obvious, surely? Red bikes go faster! Steve              |  Building 149,          |              |  13th Street,           |  Tel: (617) 726-7800              |  Charlestown, MA 02129  |  Fax: (617) 726-7808 D1 F2 9C 38 18 90 9C EB  43 BE BD 02 93 49 02 F8

Response:

… But we all know that SILVER is really the fastest color for a bike… really! Think about it – that nasty, heavy, toxic paint must be 1/10th of a mm thick, meaning ALL OF YOUR TUBES ARE 1/5mm thicker, just sitting there, out in the airstream, slowing you down mile after grueling mile.

I once tried to get Trek to build me a raw carbon (clear coat – thin!- only) road bike.  Note: this was before the carbon fiber look was "in" or even available. The rep I spoke with was for it, but the factory wasn’t keen on doing it for a reasonable price. (Paint hides sins, I guess) His line? "Paint weighs!" Tom

Response:

glad you guys liked that "Electrowoman and DynaGirl" reference. anyone remember the actresses? you might be surprised! now, on to the matter at hand. a friend e-mailed me the following from a book on (gulp) colors for quilting. i’m unsure if electric blue is in ther, but i’ll try to get some info on pink: "  Orange is proud, ambitious, arrogant, and conceited.  Its strength lies in the often negative reaction it causes.  Orange may convey ominous, forbidding, even menacing meanings.  It is also a color of buffoonery and clowning.  Is it any wonder that orange is associated with Halloween, the holiday of pranks, mischief, and the netherworld? Once orange softens to peach, the melodrama disappears, and a feeling of acceptance and warmth comes forth.  As orange darkens into brown, it becomes quiet and restful, sad and wistful, like rustling leaves in autumn.     Green is natural and hopeful and represents a return to the earth. It symbolizes vegetation, cultivation, fertility, and fruitfulness. Green stirs the emotions with thoughts of reliance, trust, and understanding.  In mournful times, it can be sympathetic, and in times of discord, it can be empathetic.  Green is adaptable, caring and giving.  As green lightens in intensity, mellow earthiness is often becomes more powerful and drama-filled." scott

Response:

My Serotta Tri-Colorado is Flourescent  hot pink and orange with racing green letters.  If your out in front no one can pass you because they are blinded by the day-glow colors. Jim Matthews

Response:

okay, no need to tell me i’ve lost it, but you can go here to discover the WWW thinks Electrawoman and Dyna Girl is the greatest Sid & Marty Krofft show of all time! submit your own vote! http://www.livingisland.com/krofftalk/favoriteshow.html please stop calling the hospital to have me committed. it is annoying, and making me look bad at work. scott

Response:

|okay, no need to tell me i’ve lost it, but you can go here to discover the |WWW thinks Electrawoman and Dyna Girl is the greatest Sid & Marty Krofft |show of all time! submit your own vote! | |http://www.livingisland.com/krofftalk/favoriteshow.html Try perusing the "Krofft Superstars" webring:   http://www.webring.org/cgi-bin/webring?ring=krofft&list Several Krofft-related sites, including two EW&DG sites! |please stop calling the hospital to have me committed. it is annoying, and |making me look bad at work. Just ’cause you have a thing for DynaGirl?  :-)  :-)  :-) — | HIGH SPEED:  "Dispatch this is 504, suspect got away."  | Anti-Spam! | | EARTHSHAKER: "Ooohhh, bitchin!!"                        |   remove   | | WHITEWATER:  "Dang, lost another one!"                  |     "*"    | | ELVIRA:      "Let’s Boooogie!!! ….. Thank you, Boys!" | in address |

Response:

Currently, I have Black and Black Yellow Fade and Deep Blue Go with the Fire engine red. Very flashy

And all the other "Andy Warhol on acid" color schemes that have been suggested…..  Yikes! No *wonder* you don’t see more ti tri bikes…. ! But we all know that SILVER is really the fastest color for a bike… really! Think about it – that nasty, heavy, toxic paint must be 1/10th of a mm thick, meaning ALL OF YOUR TUBES ARE 1/5mm thicker, just sitting there, out in the airstream, slowing you down mile after grueling mile. Why, I can only silently sob as I pass all the poor unfortunates who are reduced to riding *gasp* painted bikes in a honest-to-goodness race.  It just isn’t fair….. Heh heh heh Mark Hickey Habanero Cycles http://www.cynetfl.com/habanero/

Response:

A slick looking deep metallic purple with some yellow decals.

Response:

if it works for quilts, maybe it’ll work for you … Red: Red is provocative and fiery and stimulates the emotions in a way few other colors do.  It is the color of love and devotion.  Red is creation, excitement, and blood — the most powerful life-giving force.  When life is taken, red represents suffering.  Red can be noble and lofty, yet it can symbolize charity and compassion.  When it’s tinted to pink, it gives way to sensuality and romance; when shaded to burgundy, it represents refinement and wealth. Violet: Violet is rich, lush, and vibrant.  Like royalty, it can have intellect, dignity, and power, but violet can also be passive, like majestic mountains seen from afar.  It evokes a spiritual, ethereal quality and borders on the sublime.  Violet can be construed as demanding by many; it is an equal mix of the calm nature of blue and the passion of red, creating a struggle for position.  Light violets are pleasant yet cool, while dark violets are thought-provoking and somber. Yellow: Yellow is brilliant and bright and shines like the light of the sun.  It s warmth radiates, dazzles, and illuminates everything close to it. Yellow can add life, intelligence, intuition, and reason, but it can also overwhelm, upset, and cause the senses to lessen its impact.  When lightened, yellow is soft, cheery, and pleasant; when darkened to gold, it represents another wave of human responses — glory, adoration, and praise. Blue: Blue, the age-old friend, is devoted and true.  It is the color of the heavens and the seas.  Blue represents the traits of knowledge and innoc ence and conveys a sense of peace, relaxation, and stillness.  It is halfway between black and white, giving it equilibrium and poise.  Blue is darkness made visible.  Lighten it with white to create a mood that’s cool or cold; darken it with black to stir up blue’s stormy mysterious side.

Response:

I’ll take early morning magenta for $300, Alex. Chaz

Response:

Nobody has brought up the best bike color of all….Celeste, a.k.a. Bianchi green!   Mike in DC

Response:

Brilliant, screamingly sexy YELLOW!!!!! Andrew P.S. Thanks for the Electra-Woman & Dyno-Girl flashback! ;^)

Response:

Used to have a frame colored ‘Neon Rocket Red’.  Imagine a mix of orange and hot pink.  I was never in danger of a car driver saying they didn’t see me. —                 — Scott To reply remove NO-SPAM- from the reply address. SUPPORT THE ANTI-SPAM AMENDMENT! – http://www.cauce.org

Response:

Scott Johnson  says… Used to have a frame colored ‘Neon Rocket Red’.  Imagine a mix of orange and hot pink.  I was never in danger of a car driver saying they didn’t see me.

I always thought that the best colour for a bike was one that really stands out and that nobody else has.  That way you can always find your bike in a crowded transition area. I have a navy blue bike because I don’t usually have problems finding my bike in transition.  Its usually the last one left on the rack  Can’t wait till next season when I go up to a new age group. AJ — Simon Haigh Illawarra Triathlon Club http://www.moreton.qld.edu.au/itc/index.htm      

Response:

Ok, I have an opportunity to pick paint colors. Currently, I have Black and Black Yellow Fade and Deep Blue I need colors for my track, cyclocross, road and time trial frames. So , gimme some feedback.

I think Henry Ford said it best…"Any color you want, as long as it’s black." Cheers, Andrew — Andrew Peabody Miami

Response:

Hey,  Camouflage is the only way to go,   nobody will steal it. IMH-97(1st in ag),   IMNZ-97(1st+record)    IMH-95(2nd),  IMH-94(2nd)+++ IMH 1998-Qualified – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Ok, I have an opportunity to pick paint colors. Currently, I have Black and Black Yellow Fade and Deep Blue I need colors for my track, cyclocross, road and time trial frames. So , gimme some feedback.

Response:

Hmmmm…. I like purple with white graphics……. cheers Sam

Response:

Ok, I have an opportunity to pick paint colors. Currently, I have Black and Black Yellow Fade and Deep Blue I need colors for my track, cyclocross, road and time trial frames. So , gimme some feedback.

        Hmm, could be interesting: How ’bout: 1. Black for the track (it’s fast); 2. Black/Yellow Fade for cyclocross and the road (better   visability with the yellow); 3 Deep Blue for the time trial –calm, smooth, fast.         Hey –you think we ought to get one of those color analysis done?         You know, Yellow is a Summer/Fall color – so that works for the         road/cyclocross — blue is a Winter, Hmm, guess that won’t work         for the Time trial. Anyone else?

Response:

Question:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -I get your drift.  Actually, I was thinking about this subject yesterday, and it seems to me that the weak point in your proposition is that you are equating self interest with selfishness.  but they are not the same.  I am willing to accept as a general statement that we all humans act in our perceived self interest.  this, of course, is not to say out of selfishness.   there is nothing wrong with acting in your own self interest.  after all, whose self interest should you act in, if not your own?  this is far different from acting selfishly, which necessarily involves someone else. I really don’t think it is ever necessary to be selfish in order to serve your own self interest.  An important distinction must be made between actual self interest and perceived self interest.  Many people perceive harmful, wasteful and unneccessary things, to name just a few, to be in their self interest.  acting in furtherance of these wrongfully perceived items of self interest could well involve selfishness, I can think of many examples and many situations to both illustrate and explore these ideas.  I am sure you can too.  the one that comes to mind most readily is an employer who pays his employees a stingy wage, because he is selfish, and he perceives it to be in his self interest to do so.  in truth, he may be far better off paying a fair wage, and attracting more skilled and more productive workers.  Greed, of course, is a huge cause of selfishness, and it is never in one’s true self interest to be greedy. anyway, I throw these ideas out for thought and discussion. -Carlos

I definitly agree with you!  Though I use different words, perhaps yours are better to illistrate the point.  My problem is the way the dictionary defines selfish and unselfish.  The dictionary that I have says: Selfish – Having such reguard for one’s own interests and advantage that the happiness and welfare of others becomes of less concern than is concidered right or just; too much concern with one’s own welfare.  First off, who decides what is right or just, for we all have our own definitions for that.  The dictionary basically says that calling someone selfish is a judgement call and we are working on releasing our judgements of self and others (hence my definition of selfish – what someone calls you when you don’t want to give what they want to have).  Do we serve our own self interest?  YES! Dayly, hourly, every minute, every second.  Is the happiness and welfare of others only of secondary imortance to ourselves?  You bet!  There is a "but" here though.  A big "BUT" (no pun intended)!  When we finally realise that the happiness and welfare of others is directly tied in with our own, we can put everyone first, for it is in our highest self interest to give of ourselves and in thus doing we receive the same. That’s a big realisation, though.  And not one that is easy to come by.  We have to be selfish (as you would say Carlos) then we have to become aware that we are being that way and work to change the way we do things so that we can truely serve our self interest to the best advantage for ourselves, with the realisation that serving others, with honour and integrity, serves ourselves to the greatest advantage. That’s why I would tell someone to go out and be selfish, the lessons are inheirant.  Anyway, on with this.  The dictionary tells us: Selfless – Without reguard for oneself or one’s own interests; unselfish.  Yuck!  Now you may understand why I don’t want to be "Selfless".  I would die, if it were thus.  There has to be a balance in giving and that is receiving.  You have to able to receive as well as give or it just don’t work.  Take for instance, a person that gives everything of themselves and is not willing to receive the gifts of others to them.  They end up bitter and resentful in thier old age.  I have seen it.  How about another sinario (spelling?  What’s that?), if everyone were to give to everyone else and noone was able to receive any of it, what would happen?  Nonmovement.  They would go nowhere and they would all die, for they would just give it all away, all the time.  This is why I use the word "selfish" the way that I do.  I don’t use it as a judgement, for who am I to judge?  I use it the same way that you use the words "self interest".  In seeing how you use those words I can better explain what it is that I mean when I say "We are all selfish, all the time".  Thank you Carlos.  I am truely grateful for the time you have spent in response to my post.  Hope we may be able to share some more good insights. Drew

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -Samuel.  What do you mean by "Unselfish"?  We are all completely 100% selfish at all times.  Examine the underlying motives for everything you do and you will find that it is from a selfish base.  Why do we seak answers?  For our own self gratification, of course.  What do we know except that which we experience of ourselves?  We don’t know anything except through self experience.  Why do we want relationships?  So that we can satisfy our selfish wants.  Why do we go off on a hermitage, alone in the wilderness, to find God?  For the selfish desire for inner peace and release from the self imposed torment of our lives.  Ask any of these questions and really listen and you will find that we do all things from selfishness.  Even gifts are given selfishly.  There is a difference between Ego selfishness and True selfishness.  Ego selfishness is the attempt to take power from another.  True selfishness is owning your own power and the knowing that you don’t NEED anyone elses.  How can we give, if there is nothing to give from?  If we were selfless, then how can we give of ourselves?  So, how can one be unselfish if they are selfish all the time?  Selfish is always used as sort of a swear word in this society. I don’t agree.  It’s time that we get a little selfish and stop giving our power away to those that want us to be selfless.  SELFISH – What someone calls you when you don’t want give what they want to have. Now, Samual, I really do think you are talking about releasing the NEED (or the ego self) and coming from the true self.  Gifting from the heart.  Am I selfish?  YOU BET!  Is this a selfish act?  YUP!  If I didn’t think I would get anything out of posting here, then I wouldn’t bother.  If I didn’t think that I would get anything out of life, then I wouldn’t bother.  All the true existentialists are dead. If this is all there is, then this is all there is.  Why not make the best of it?  BE who you are with relish!  And if you do not like and love who you are, then change it.  BE selfish and do it for yourself, not for your mom or dad.  Not for your friends.  Not for your lover. Not for God.  For yourself.  For, who else is there that is more important to your well BEing than you?  If you sit around waiting for others to do it for you, you will be waiting a long time.  Thanks for reading. With gratitude, Drew  

Hi Drew: I’ve been pondering upon your statements and questions for a few hours … and don’t know how to answer them! About all I can do is try to clear up what I meant by "unselfish". IMO … people who *live* as ‘Saints’ have banished the ‘little voice’ that says, … "ME first" … from their mind. They have *overcome* the self-ishness which we are all afflicted with and programmed to yield to, in this ‘dog eat dog’ world. They *live* altruistic lives … doing for others what needs to be done, with no thought of … "What’s in it for ME." **Expecting nothing** … not a "thank you", nor acknowledgement, for anything they do. In context … I thought the meaning was fairly clear. :Saints … have banished their personal greed, :and take the time to notice other people’s need. :Then … working in an absolutely UNSELFISH way, :they bring about the things … for which others ‘pray’. My apologies … if my choice of words has failed to convey exactly what is meant. Regards, samuel

Response:

It is as I thought you were trying to convey.  It is what I would concider "True Selfishness".  As I said in my post, we cannot get out of being selfish, we can, however, get out of our egos and thereby release the NEED to be satisfied by others.  This is a release of expectation that you will get a certain thing from someone or some situation and be open to receive what ever is given in that situation. For expectations come from neediness, which in turn comes from fear of not having (Ego).  When a person understands that he/she already has whatever they "NEED" then expectations are no longer abundant and he/she will be able to receive what is truely given and not be disappointed when they do not get what they expected to recieve.  "Ego Selfishness", as I call it, is when someone manipulates a situation, not only to benifit self, but to get a specific response and to feel in control of another to feel powerful.  "True Selfishness", on the other hand, is the release of the NEED to feel powerful, for the person already knows they ARE powerful, and the release of the expectation of what SHOULD happen to benifit him/her, for the person KNOWS that whatever happens, whether they judge it good or bad, ALWAYS benifits him/herself.  The trick is, being willing to receive what ever it is with an open heart and learn what there is to learn from it.  Thus, ALWAYS are we benifitted in self and from this point are able to give as much, if not more, than we receive.  We will always be selfish and we will always do things to further our selves.  The things that we should be working on though is releasing the ego and be willing to get to the point where we can give from the heart and receive to it as well, without expectation or need, the gifts that are given.  For, if we already know that we already have what we need, then the gifts we receive is just more icing on the cake.  Hey, thanks for reading and your clearification, Samuel. With gratitude, Drew

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -Samuel.  What do you mean by "Unselfish"?  We are all completely 100% selfish at all times.  Examine the underlying motives for everything you do and you will find that it is from a selfish base.  Why do we seak answers?  For our own self gratification, of course.  What do we know except that which we experience of ourselves?  We don’t know anything except through self experience.  Why do we want relationships?  So that we can satisfy our selfish wants.  Why do we go off on a hermitage, alone in the wilderness, to find God?  For the selfish desire for inner peace and release from the self imposed torment of our lives.  Ask any of these questions and really listen and you will find that we do all things from selfishness.  Even gifts are given selfishly.  There is a difference between Ego selfishness and True selfishness.  Ego selfishness is the attempt to take power from another.  True selfishness is owning your own power and the knowing that you don’t NEED anyone elses.  How can we give, if there is nothing to give from?  If we were selfless, then how can we give of ourselves?  So, how can one be unselfish if they are selfish all the time?  Selfish is always used as sort of a swear word in this society. I don’t agree.  It’s time that we get a little selfish and stop giving our power away to those that want us to be selfless.  SELFISH – What someone calls you when you don’t want give what they want to have. Now, Samual, I really do think you are talking about releasing the NEED (or the ego self) and coming from the true self.  Gifting from the heart.  Am I selfish?  YOU BET!  Is this a selfish act?  YUP!  If I didn’t think I would get anything out of posting here, then I wouldn’t bother.  If I didn’t think that I would get anything out of life, then I wouldn’t bother.  All the true existentialists are dead. If this is all there is, then this is all there is.  Why not make the best of it?  BE who you are with relish!  And if you do not like and love who you are, then change it.  BE selfish and do it for yourself, not for your mom or dad.  Not for your friends.  Not for your lover. Not for God.  For yourself.  For, who else is there that is more important to your well BEing than you?  If you sit around waiting for others to do it for you, you will be waiting a long time.  Thanks for reading. With gratitude, Drew  

this is a gross misunderstanding of the subject matter, but from the point of view of many, if not most, people, absolutely correct. if being unselfish were easy, anyone could do it.  a single unselfish act is a great accomplishment.

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Samuel.  What do you mean by "Unselfish"?  We are all completely 100% selfish at all times.  Examine the underlying motives for everything you do and you will find that it is from a selfish base.  Why do we seak answers?  For our own self gratification, of course.  What do we know except that which we experience of ourselves?  We don’t know anything except through self experience.  Why do we want relationships?  So that we can satisfy our selfish wants.  Why do we go off on a hermitage, alone in the wilderness, to find God?  For the selfish desire for inner peace and release from the self imposed torment of our lives.  Ask any of these questions and really listen and you will find that we do all things from selfishness.  Even gifts are given selfishly.  There is a difference between Ego selfishness and True selfishness.  Ego selfishness is the attempt to take power from another.  True selfishness is owning your own power and the knowing that you don’t NEED anyone elses.  How can we give, if there is nothing to give from?  If we were selfless, then how can we give of ourselves?  So, how can one be unselfish if they are selfish all the time?  Selfish is always used as sort of a swear word in this society. I don’t agree.  It’s time that we get a little selfish and stop giving our power away to those that want us to be selfless.  SELFISH – What someone calls you when you don’t want give what they want to have. Now, Samual, I really do think you are talking about releasing the NEED (or the ego self) and coming from the true self.  Gifting from the heart.  Am I selfish?  YOU BET!  Is this a selfish act?  YUP!  If I didn’t think I would get anything out of posting here, then I wouldn’t bother.  If I didn’t think that I would get anything out of life, then I wouldn’t bother.  All the true existentialists are dead. If this is all there is, then this is all there is.  Why not make the best of it?  BE who you are with relish!  And if you do not like and love who you are, then change it.  BE selfish and do it for yourself, not for your mom or dad.  Not for your friends.  Not for your lover. Not for God.  For yourself.  For, who else is there that is more important to your well BEing than you?  If you sit around waiting for others to do it for you, you will be waiting a long time.  Thanks for reading. With gratitude, Drew   Hi Drew: I’ve been pondering upon your statements and questions for a few hours … and don’t know how to answer them! About all I can do is try to clear up what I meant by "unselfish". IMO … people who *live* as ‘Saints’ have banished the ‘little voice’ that says, … "ME first" … from their mind.

i think they have a totally different concept of "me."   it is closely tied to the concept of duty.

Response:

this is a gross misunderstanding of the subject matter, but from the point of view of many, if not most, people, absolutely correct. if being unselfish were easy, anyone could do it.  a single unselfish act is a great accomplishment.

I understand and even agree on a level.  My point is we cannot be "Selfless", it’s not in the program.  Everything we do, we do out of "Selfish" motives.  Take our needs for a moment.  Food, water, shelter and clothing.  These are the things that we need (not ego NEED, but true need) to survive.  If one were "Selfless" he/she would give all this up to someone else that needed it and therefore die.  So, even in being alive are we selfish.  There has to be a self to give from or we would have nothing to give.  Get my drift?   I do have a question for you though.  What would you concider a selfless act?  Maybe your answer will help me explain my possition better.  Thanks for the response.  With gratitude, Drew

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -this is a gross misunderstanding of the subject matter, but from the point of view of many, if not most, people, absolutely correct. if being unselfish were easy, anyone could do it.  a single unselfish act is a great accomplishment. I understand and even agree on a level.  My point is we cannot be "Selfless", it’s not in the program.  Everything we do, we do out of "Selfish" motives.  Take our needs for a moment.  Food, water, shelter and clothing.  These are the things that we need (not ego NEED, but true need) to survive.  If one were "Selfless" he/she would give all this up to someone else that needed it and therefore die.  So, even in being alive are we selfish.  There has to be a self to give from or we would have nothing to give.  Get my drift?   I do have a question for you though.  What would you concider a selfless act?  Maybe your answer will help me explain my possition better.  Thanks for the response.  With gratitude, Drew

I get your drift.  Actually, I was thinking about this subject yesterday, and it seems to me that the weak point in your proposition is that you are equating self interest with selfishness.  but they are not the same.  I am willing to accept as a general statement that we all humans act in our perceived self interest.  this, of course, is not to say out of selfishness.   there is nothing wrong with acting in your own self interest.  after all, whose self interest should you act in, if not your own?  this is far different from acting selfishly, which necessarily involves someone else. I really don’t think it is ever necessary to be selfish in order to serve your own self interest.  An important distinction must be made between actual self interest and perceived self interest.  Many people perceive harmful, wasteful and unneccessary things, to name just a few, to be in their self interest.  acting in furtherance of these wrongfully perceived items of self interest could well involve selfishness, I can think of many examples and many situations to both illustrate and explore these ideas.  I am sure you can too.  the one that comes to mind most readily is an employer who pays his employees a stingy wage, because he is selfish, and he perceives it to be in his self interest to do so.  in truth, he may be far better off paying a fair wage, and attracting more skilled and more productive workers.  Greed, of course, is a huge cause of selfishness, and it is never in one’s true self interest to be greedy. anyway, I throw these ideas out for thought and discussion. -Carlos

Response:

Samuel.  What do you mean by "Unselfish"?  We are all completely 100% selfish at all times.  Examine the underlying motives for everything you do and you will find that it is from a selfish base.  Why do we seak answers?  For our own self gratification, of course.  What do we know except that which we experience of ourselves?  We don’t know anything except through self experience.  Why do we want relationships?  So that we can satisfy our selfish wants.  Why do we go off on a hermitage, alone in the wilderness, to find God?  For the selfish desire for inner peace and release from the self imposed torment of our lives.  Ask any of these questions and really listen and you will find that we do all things from selfishness.  Even gifts are given selfishly.  There is a difference between Ego selfishness and True selfishness.  Ego selfishness is the attempt to take power from another.  True selfishness is owning your own power and the knowing that you don’t NEED anyone elses.  How can we give, if there is nothing to give from?  If we were selfless, then how can we give of ourselves?  So, how can one be unselfish if they are selfish all the time?  Selfish is always used as sort of a swear word in this society. I don’t agree.  It’s time that we get a little selfish and stop giving our power away to those that want us to be selfless.  SELFISH – What someone calls you when you don’t want give what they want to have. Now, Samual, I really do think you are talking about releasing the NEED (or the ego self) and coming from the true self.  Gifting from the heart.  Am I selfish?  YOU BET!  Is this a selfish act?  YUP!  If I didn’t think I would get anything out of posting here, then I wouldn’t bother.  If I didn’t think that I would get anything out of life, then I wouldn’t bother.  All the true existentialists are dead. If this is all there is, then this is all there is.  Why not make the best of it?  BE who you are with relish!  And if you do not like and love who you are, then change it.  BE selfish and do it for yourself, not for your mom or dad.  Not for your friends.  Not for your lover. Not for God.  For yourself.  For, who else is there that is more important to your well BEing than you?  If you sit around waiting for others to do it for you, you will be waiting a long time.  Thanks for reading. With gratitude, Drew  

Response:

Newsgroups:   misc.activism.progressive Zapatista Army of National Liberation Mexico. January 14, 1998 To the National Commission of Intermediation San Cristobal de Las Casas, Chiapas, Mexico Ladies and gentlemen members of Conai: We have become aware of the document called "For a strategy for peace with democracy" which you addressed to the branches of the government, the EZLN, to Civil Society and to the peoples of the world, dated January 11, 1998. In the part which you direct to the EZLN, you demand that we continue to act within the parameters of the law of March 11, 1995 sustaining our will for dialogue and negotiation; that we continue to struggle politically; that we deepen our efforts for dialogue with other communities and indigenous and non-indigenous organizations in Chiapas; and that we increase the dialogue with organizations which belong to civil society and political society. Since January 12 of 1994 (and not since the encounter of San Miguel in April of 1995 as you point out in your letter) the EZLN has insisted once and again on a path for dialogue towards a peaceful solution to the war.  Our civil initiatives have not been few or small.  They have been accompanied by the best of national and international civil society in order to construct conditions for a peace with justice and dignity. Examples of these peaceful initiatives include the dialogue at the Cathedral and the National Democratic Convention in 1994; the dialogue of San Andres and the National and International consultation for peace in 1995; the call to organize the FZLN, the celebration of the National Indigenous Forum, the signature of the first agreements with the federal government (which have yet to be fulfilled, the First Continental Encounter, the National Forum for the Jreform of the State, the First Intercontinental Encounter for Humanity and against Neoliberalism,  the tri-partite meetings of  Cocopa-EZLN-Conai in 1996; and the march on Mexico City by the 1,111 in 1997. The government response to our apparent will for dialogue and negotiation has been the lack of fulfillment of the first signed agreements, the activation of paramilitary groups, the assassination of our support bases, the persecution of our leaders,  the attack of the federal soldiers against the communities, and the saturation of the military in all the territory of Chiapas (in spite of the intended pretense to minimize the geography of this injustice with the label of "conflict zone.) But the government says it is false that they play at peace while making war.    The government ordered the assassination of 45 indigenous people at Acteal as a departure point for an offensive against us. Through the information in the press and the confessions of some of the accused, it is evident that the massacre was planned with anticipation and full knowledge and direction from the authorities.  A few days ago, Public Security Police were detained by the Immigration Service and not by the one who is supposedlly applying the "regulations applied to weapons and explosives.", as they were transporting weapons coming from Guatemala. The recipients? The paramilitaries. But the government says it is false that they play at peace while making war. At the same time we learned of your letter, we received confirmation of the assassination of our companera Guadalupe Mendez Lopez, in an attack by the Public Security police of the state of Chiapas against a peaceful demonstration at the municipal head of Ocosingo on January 12th. As a response to the great mobilizations for peace with justice and dignity which occurred in several cities in Mexico and in the world, the police forces of the government shot at a civil demonstration of indigenous. But the government says it is false that they play at peace while making war. In the community of La Realidad, for example the federal Army doubles the number of artilleries vehicles, of military patrols. Four times a day, up to 38 motorized united "travel" through the Tojolabal community. Military airplanes carry out daily and nightly flights at different times. By day they carry out maneuvers used in aerial combat for the bombing and strafing of fixed positions. Perhaps they rehearse the future. But the government says it is false that they play at peace while making war. The federal government, verbally and by actions of its Secretary of Justice, defines the "new" strategy for Chiapas: the replacement of mediators, the persecution and isolation of the Zapatistas, and large amounts of money to pretend to construct the peace while feeding the war. The "strategy" is absurd: Mister Rabasa is named "coordinator of the dilaogue" (not of the "government" but of the "dialogue".  Dialogue with whom? Where is the other part of the dialogue which together with the government, names him "coordinator"? Where is the place for the mediation?  For  the Cocopa? Mister Rabasa hurries to declare that his objective is not a dialogue with the EZLN but something broader, a "Copernican revolution".  Surely  he refers to a dialogue with organizations other than the EZLN at many "little tables" (as they have tried before ) to distract public opinion and tranquilize the European Union. The new "governmental strategy" is a dialogue without the other part, without mediation, accompaniment, it is a monologue.  The fact that Rabasa Gamboa was named merits a title of "coordinator of the government monologue about Chiapas" But the government says it is false that they play at peace while making war. By the time this letter reaches its destination, our companeros and companeras of the support bases will have already buried Guadalupe Mendez Lopez in the Zapatista mountains.  Guadalupe died fighting through political means and the response she received was a 5.56 calibre bullet in her "left frontal" abdomen. But the government says it is false that they play at peace while making war. When this letter arrives in your hands, the federal government will have given away more declarations of "peace”, it will make an accounting of its intermediaries with the "actors in the conflict" and will beg to be believed when it says that the only thing which is happening in Chiapas is a conflict "among the poor" and will continue to bet that the "bitter drinks" of Acteal and Ocosingo will be digested (and forgotten) by public opinion. And the Army will continue to pursue us and provoke confrontations. But the government says it is false that they play at peace while making war. What effort for dialogue with indigenous and non-indigenous organizations, with civil or political society can we deepen or increase when they hunt us down like animals, with hunting dogs and all the technological paraphernalia of death? But the government says it is false that they play at peace while making war. Come and speak with the soldiers (silence will be the likely response to the questions about persecution), talk with the police ("Any son of a whore who throws a rock at me will get a bullet" they will answer with anger. Speak to them about dialogue, about respect, about the law, about human rights. "I am only following orders they will always answer.  Whose orders are they? We know what the orders are. ("Find them and wipe them out") but we do not know where the orders come from. But the government says it is false that they play at peace while making war. The Army searches diligently for an encounter with our forces, this can be proven by the nature of their movements, their approach and their distribution.  Do they do this while following "orders"? If so, then where is the government’s will for dialogue? Are they acting on their own? If so, then who is really governing this country? But the government says it is false that they play at peace while making war. What law should we obey if the one who advocates it does not do so, and the Executive Branch breaks it according to its interest and convenience? But the government says it is false that they play at peace while making war. The federal government is not willing to negotiate with truth and responsibility. It desires, and seeks desperately, a breathing space in the actual crisis. All its efforts point in that direction. It is not peace it seeks, it is time. To play at a possible solution to the conflict is its objective. Afterwards, when the waters turn its way, it will insist once again on the blows and threats for surrender. But the government says it is false that they play at peace while making war. That man does not want peace. Now he is bolder, he has erased that word in his speech from his discourse in regards to Chiapas and us.  Perhaps it is better that way. That way there is no deception. We are not willing to surrender nor to tolerate blows with impunity. All our actual effort is directed at resisting the harassment and to avoid following into the continual and more definitive belligerent provocations of the government. How long must we wait? This is the question drawn by the blood of Acteal. This is the question which we ask in front of the tomb of Guadalupe. This is the question for all of you, for all of them, for everyone. Vale. Health and remember that peace must have justice and dignity, otherwise it is just a silent war. )From the mountains of the Mexican southeast. For the Indigenous Revolutionary Clandestine Committee Zapatista Army of National Liberation Subcomandante Insurgente Marcos Mexico, January of 1998 Translated by: Cecilia Rodriguez, NCDLJ ITEM: U.S. military aid to the … read more »

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – "A Saint we call that man who hath in Sat-Lok merged his soul; the fourth Realm (Dimension) beyond the three, the durbar of Satnam and Satguru. There the soul of the Saint enjoyeth bliss and resideth in Sat-Purush and Sat-Shabd. Save the Saint, none reacheth there; and without reaching there none can be a Saint." Swami Ji Maharaj (1818-1878) From Radha Soami Teachings by Prof. L. R. Puri ‘Saints’ and ‘Sinners’. Saints … are just ex-sinners who have figured out, what the object of living is really about. They’ve learned that lusting for material things, only burden, sorrow and misery brings. Saints … have banished their personal greed, and take the time to notice other people’s need. Then … working in an absolutely UNSELFISH way, they bring about the things … for which others ‘pray’. Saints … would not be such a rare breed, if more of us *chose* to emulate their unself-ish deed. We just have to tell our EGO to go to Hell! Then as Saints … instead of sinners … we can all dwell. Saints … were ordinary people … who became IN-lightened. Of being Deity* manifesting … they are not frightened. They have learned … ALTRUISTIC … is the way to live. They have learned … UNCONDITIONAL … is the way to GIVE. samuel  - 1998 Sat Lok is our True Home. Sat Nam is the True Lord.  Satguru is the Perfect Master.  Sat-Purush is another name for True Lord.  Sat-Shabd means the True Sound, or The True Holy Spirit. Michael Martin, Guru of Surat Shabd Yoga, or The Philosophy Of The Masters

Dear Samuel, Saints … are just ex-sinners who have figured out, what the object of living is really about.

Sometimes it’s likes that, but there is another type of Saint, who has been sent from the Supreme Being to save us.  You can even say, it is the Lord, himself, who comes as a Saviour. We just have to tell our EGO to go to Hell! Then as Saints … instead of sinners … we can all dwell.

Let’s don’t oversimplify things.  We have to follow the spiritual discipline, as taught by the Perfect Master, if we are to conquer the ego. Thanks for that posting, Samuel, it’s a good one. Michael Martin Guru of Surat Shabd Yoga, or The Philosophy Of The Masters

Response:

"A Saint we call that man who hath in Sat-Lok merged his soul; the fourth Realm (Dimension) beyond the three, the durbar of Satnam and Satguru. There the soul of the Saint enjoyeth bliss and resideth in Sat-Purush and Sat-Shabd. Save the Saint, none reacheth there; and without reaching there none can be a Saint." Swami Ji Maharaj (1818-1878) From Radha Soami Teachings by Prof. L. R. Puri

‘Saints’ and ‘Sinners’. Saints … are just ex-sinners who have figured out, what the object of living is really about. They’ve learned that lusting for material things, only burden, sorrow and misery brings. Saints … have banished their personal greed, and take the time to notice other people’s need. Then … working in an absolutely UNSELFISH way, they bring about the things … for which others ‘pray’. Saints … would not be such a rare breed, if more of us *chose* to emulate their unself-ish deed. We just have to tell our EGO to go to Hell! Then as Saints … instead of sinners … we can all dwell. Saints … were ordinary people … who became IN-lightened. Of being Deity* manifesting … they are not frightened. They have learned … ALTRUISTIC … is the way to live. They have learned … UNCONDITIONAL … is the way to GIVE. samuel  - 1998 – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -Sat Lok is our True Home. Sat Nam is the True Lord.  Satguru is the Perfect Master.  Sat-Purush is another name for True Lord.  Sat-Shabd means the True Sound, or The True Holy Spirit. Michael Martin, Guru of Surat Shabd Yoga, or The Philosophy Of The Masters

Response:

"A Saint we call that man who hath in Sat-Lok merged his soul; the fourth Realm (Dimension) beyond the three, the durbar of Satnam and Satguru. There the soul of the Saint enjoyeth bliss and resideth in Sat-Purush and Sat-Shabd. Save the Saint, none reacheth there; and without reaching there none can be a Saint." Swami Ji Maharaj (1818-1878) From Radha Soami Teachings by Prof. L. R. Puri Sat Lok is our True Home. Sat Nam is the True Lord.  Satguru is the Perfect Master.  Sat-Purush is another name for True Lord.  Sat-Shabd means the True Sound, or The True Holy Spirit. Michael Martin, Guru of Surat Shabd Yoga, or The Philosophy Of The Masters

Response:

Question:

I have a new software suite for managing small business. I’d really appreciate some feedback from the accounting and small business consulting community on its merits. Don’t bother to send Spam and get rich quick schemes. They will all be ignored. The target market is the small entrepreneur who may work alone or may have as many as a dozen or so employees. In other words — small, micro. The business person who sends out quotes one minute, invoices the next, then schedules a meeting, writes some cheques to suppliers, issues some credit notes, and then perhaps writes a series of sales letters to a prospects, and then because someone’s on the phone looks up some data from last month. In most circumstances most of these processes would require separate software programs. It’s the objective of 7Office to bring all into an integrated and easy to use environment. 7Office has been in continuous use since last September, but it’s taken considerable time to build the website, the marketing structure, add new features and polish. I’d like to solicit reviews of this product either as private feedback or in publishable form. Most of all we’d like some feedback from professionals in the accounting field who understand the needs of micro business and also the needs of proper sales records. One special note. This program is not a general ledger accounting program. That’s not its intention. It doesn’t reconcile bank accounts and it doesn’t maintain audit trails. Rather it initiates records and it exports sales and tax data to such programs as AccPac’s Simply Accounting. The website is at http://www.7Office.com where a demo can be downloaded. We welcome your comments. Morley Chalmers The first integrated billing       All-in-One Invoicing, Purchasing, Receivables, & contact manager        Call Reports, Scheduling, To Do Lists, Letters for small business

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I have a new software suite for managing small business. I’d really appreciate some feedback from the accounting and small business consulting community on its merits. Don’t bother to send Spam and get rich quick schemes. They will all be ignored. The target market is the small entrepreneur who may work alone or may have as many as a dozen or so employees. In other words — small, micro. The business person who sends out quotes one minute, invoices the next, then schedules a meeting, writes some cheques to suppliers, issues some credit notes, and then perhaps writes a series of sales letters to a prospects, and then because someone’s on the phone looks up some data from last month. In most circumstances most of these processes would require separate software programs. It’s the objective of 7Office to bring all into an integrated and easy to use environment. 7Office has been in continuous use since last September, but it’s taken considerable time to build the website, the marketing structure, add new features and polish. I’d like to solicit reviews of this product either as private feedback or in publishable form. Most of all we’d like some feedback from professionals in the accounting field who understand the needs of micro business and also the needs of proper sales records. One special note. This program is not a general ledger accounting program. That’s not its intention. It doesn’t reconcile bank accounts and it doesn’t maintain audit trails. Rather it initiates records and it exports sales and tax data to such programs as AccPac’s Simply Accounting. The website is at http://www.7Office.com where a demo can be downloaded. We welcome your comments. Morley Chalmers The first integrated billing       All-in-One Invoicing, Purchasing, Receivables, & contact manager        Call Reports, Scheduling, To Do Lists, Letters for small business

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Reading about you target market brought The New View accounting system to my mind.   It picked up where you left off, yet you had some great ideas too. Perhaps the two should be combined. One of New Views’ target markets is the small entrepreneur who may work alone or may have as many as a dozen or so employees. In other words — small, micro. The business person who sends out quotes one minute, invoices the next, then schedules a meeting, writes some checks to suppliers, issues some credit notes, and then perhaps writes a series of sales letters to a prospects, and then because someone’s on the phone looks up some data from last month. I make  New Views do much of that now including the quote by making up a dummy invoice, printing it, store the dummy in a temporary external file for later and then erase it so it doesn’t get mixed up in the real accounting books.   New Views analysis view can be used like a contract manager comparing actual to budget and displaying the differences. New Views is a general ledger program that writes those checks, prints outs invoices and statements, has a notes view to store that sales letter. New Views is an:  integrated billing – All-in-One Invoicing, Purchasing, Receivables, and Financial Reporting accounting system. It does reconcile bank accounts and it does maintain audit trails.  It even computes and accumulates accounting data for sales and tax data which can even be exported or imported.  My man even wrote a jig program to export the accounts receivable mailing list.  New Views was designed to be a stand alone work horse program, but can be saddled up with private add on programs for those special needs. . However your:         Scheduling         To Do Lists         Letters  for small business         Approach to quotes         Writing a series of sales letters to a prospects         Contract manager seem like great ideas for New Views add on programing to me.  New Views is always working to improve its product.  Something like that should be made part of the New Views program.  Might I convince you to contact Q.W.Page, Inc at                                                                 qwpage.com You were looking for feedback from professionals in the accounting field who understand the needs of micro business and also the needs of proper sales records. I experimented with exporting and importing in and out of New Views and then viewing the results by various means. Might it be possible with a little time one could easily add your program into a New Views Set of books and get the best.   I hope so.  I think I could sell that combo. Kress K. Cave, C.P.A. — Accounting Systems*Real Estate Taxation*Income Tax  I love to work with NEW VIEWS -The visual approach to accounting!

Response: