But what has that got to do with cost-benefit analysis? On the basis of cost-benefit analysis rescuing a kid from a well is an extravagance, and preventive health care is a good deal.  JMS But - if you rescue a kid from a well there's a lot of great  JMS publicity - which is, to some, exceptionally valuable.  Providing  JMS preventative  health care is not nearly as newsworthy, is it? I think it is more likely to be because the fire department isn't into preventive medicine. If a child falls down a well and they go off to rescue it, it costs more than it would to save a lot of kids' lives by preventive medicine, and fewer benefit. But the cost of maintaining the fire department would not drop significantly if the DIDN'T respond to any particular emergency. But if the city council, or whoever is responsible, is faced with a choice, they might decide that, after a cost-benefit analysis, building a new clinic might be more cost-effective in saving lives than buying a new fire engine.  JMS Maybe I'm a little fuddled about the concept - or rather, about  JMS the  application of the project.  It's just that I see a lot of  JMS strange moves after some 'cost-benefit analysis'.  That  JMS overhauling the infrastructure of the US's water distribution  JMS system is too expensive to do - how much is it going to cost when  JMS some of these systems really start to  disintigrate? And if the water reticulation system breaks down, they may find that they weren't acting on a cost-benefit analysis at all. City councils usually don't look much further than the next election. At one town meeting in Durban when some question was being debated, someone said We must think of posterity , and someone else responded, Why, what has posterity ever done for us? Keep well Steve Hayes   WWW: http://www.geocities.com/Athens/7734/steve.htm   E-mail: This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it FamilyNet < Internet Gated Mail http://www.fmlynet.org

There is no such thing as business rights.  Only people have rights.  s Come again? I agree that only people have human/civil rights, but  s surely, businesses have rights as established by the laws that  s govern, well, business. Most businesses (and other corporate bodies) are regarded as judicial persons in the eyes of the law - that is, they have the right to sue and be sued, to buy and sell property etc. In the USSR, this judicial personhood of corporate bodies was abolished. Keep well Steve Hayes   WWW: http://www.geocities.com/Athens/7734/steve.htm   E-mail: This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it FamilyNet < Internet Gated Mail http://www.fmlynet.org

FamilyNet HQ: Telnet:www.family-bbs.net Michael Zeleny wrote in a message to All:  MZ A stronger case arises by analogy with imputing doctrinal promotion  MZ logically and historically independent of substantial institutional  MZ realization, as in anarcho-syndicalist doctrine putatively  MZ promoting violent repression through fascist insurrection.  Setting  MZ aside the semantics of promotion, my faith in the clockwork of  MZ humanity never fails to get buttressed by witnessing all things  MZ Usenettish fall into place, as tendentious tediousness gets  MZ seconded by paltering anility. Dr Perlmuter, I presume? Keep well Steve Hayes   WWW: http://www.geocities.com/Athens/7734/steve.htm   E-mail: This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it FamilyNet < Internet Gated Mail http://www.fmlynet.org

 RS :  RS : And that's exactly the _object_ive of this provision: to impose : a  RS punitive cost to crush Cuba economically by using the US's :  RS economic might. It's cynical and it's shameless.  RS YOu write as if it is a bad thing. To bring an  RS adversary to his knees without overt violence  RS is to be welcomed.  RS Why should the US be ashamed of harassing a nasty  RS dictator, who treats his people cruelly ? Because it's only incidental that he's a nasty dictator. They've supported many other equally nasty dictators. And in Castro's case, he deposed an even worse dictator, and only got really nasty after the harassment. Keep well Steve Hayes   WWW: http://www.geocities.com/Athens/7734/steve.htm   E-mail: This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it FamilyNet < Internet Gated Mail http://www.fmlynet.org

Ob TheBigFix Quote:  Trying to be an anarchist in the U.S. is like being a spoilsport at an orgy. Some people believe in the existence of trouble shooters who will never ever allow thrashpassers mentally use their common memory ObArticle[1] : Fechner, G. T. (1858). Beobachtungen welche zu beweisen scheinen dass durch die Uebung der Glieder der eine Seite die der andern zugleich mit geübt werden. Ber Sächs Ges Wiss Leipzig Math-Phys Cl 10, p. 70-76. ObArticle[2] : Hardin, Garret (1968). Tragedy of the Commons. Science, vol. 162, p. 1243-1248. Jac. This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it (replaces This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it ) j.m.a.m.oppers@(hccnet|hetnet|chello).nl

The personification of business is an intersting phenomenon, by the way.  In the present matter, for example, I have not yet seen anyone note that it is the stockholders of the tobacco questions who must pay any penalties through the reduction of the value of the company which they own.  Since many of these stockholders are those with pension funds who hold such stock, the penalty is widespread.  In any case, the people who lied bear little to none of the cost of the penalties. investing is gambling. When people put their pension funds in lawsuit-prone industries like tobacco they know the risks. The real problem is with the people who run pension funds. They sometimes ignore the possibility of lawsuits, simply bacause they are salaried professionals, who stand to lose their jobs at most for performing poorly. How often does the avg. pension fund beat the best mutual fund? I wonder. And look at all the people who put their money in pension funds - no time or clue about investing & just want more money. There are so many better stocks out there that one cannot feel bad for the greedies who invested in Phillip Morris. Some say, the company still has potential, though, and could possibly be right.