"Kim W5TIT" wrote:

(snip) So, that having been said--it seems very
apparent to me that Dwight has some ideas for
which he has no real basis in fact. (And, that's
not to say that my ideas are all based in fact-
-but I at least admit it). And, I can't believe that
he expects people to accept--let alone agree--
with him that we are too busy and stupid to do
our own research to make ethical purchase
decisions; yet we should warm up to the idea
that government and business can be held to a
high enough standard (uh, even though we are
too busy and stupid to research what the
standard should be) that they can "do it for
us." And, that's not even bringing into the
equation that I've seen Dwight rail against the
"liberals" for big government principles--yet here
he is espousing to a huge government *and* rolling
the corporate world up into it. The "conservatives"
woud have a field day for that blessing!! (snip)


Kim, I've repeatedly said I don't have all the answers, am offering my
opinions only, that I don't "expect" anything from anybody, and that this is
a simple discussion (not a proclamation or mandate for all to agree). Now,
either you haven't read that (which means you have no idea what I've said),
can't understand it (too stupid), or are so determined to argue you don't
really care what I've actually said.

I've also repeatedly told you that my comments were limited solely to the
economy, not "ethical purchase decisions," the environment (Exxon), or
whatever other issues you want to throw in. In spite of that, you still try
to twist my words to apply to other things. I've also never said consumers
are "too busy and stupid" to do research. What I've actually said is that
information is not that easily available for consumers to do that research
(economic research, not anything else) and that such research is simply too
massive to truly expect consumers to do. You've offered nothing substantial
to challenge that assesment.

I'm also not "espousing to a huge government." What I've said is that
government should pass regulations to insure consumers have better access to
the information they need to make wise economic purchasing decisions, that
government better monitor business to insure that information is correct,
that government offer the information they collected to consumers in
condensed form, that immigration be better managed, that curbs should be put
on credit, that corporate profits be capped, rules changed to prevent
factories and industry moving overseas, and so on. Even if you don't agree,
none of these are exactly radical new ideas - all have been widely discussed
for many years.

This is the last time I will say all of this. If you continue to
misrepresent my position after this, then I'll assume you're doing so simply
to be dishonest and will respond accordingly.


Dwight Stewart (W5NET)

http://www.qsl.net/w5net/