cordless drill not working

Page 3 of 5  

wrote:

A "lot"? whatever,it doesn't negate my statement about cotton.

growing and producing a product for sale that's KNOWN to be addictive,toxic and polluting is not immoral? Tobacco has no good use.

Irrelevant. one wrong does not make another 'right'. and you certainly do not see cans in the quantities that cig butts are found by the roadsides.

In that example,it clearly is not the MAJORITY of fast food consumers that toss their trash improperly,as is the case with smokers. Cig butts are a major problem for wastewater treatment plants.

Use some common sense,will ya? The sort of statements you posted here makes you appear to be stupid. Lightning is a NATURAL phenomenon.
--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Yes.
If it were "unprofitable" it wouldn't be grown. There are other crops.

Again, your opinion. People pay good money for it so it does have good use, by definition.

Not irrelevant. Why aren't you supporting a ban on everything that people discard or may have discarded illegally? The truth is, you're just another statist.

By volume?

You've shown no evidence that the MAJORITY of smokers toss their butts improperly.

As far right as you are, I'm just pointing out your statist beliefs. There is nothing that separates you, ideologically, from the Obaminables.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Whose definition. All my econ classes indicated that paying good money for something meant it had a use for that person. No discussion of goodness or badness. Just because something is being sold doesn't mean anything in this area, by definition.
--
I get off on '57 Chevys
I get off on screamin' guitars
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Was the money good? It was traded for something of equal value, BY DEFINITION.

If you really took Econ 101, and I doubt it, you would understand that he, and the person who had the tobacco, are the only people who mattered.

I see you didn't take even Econ 101. <what a moron>
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

faulty logic; as if paying "good" money for something automatically makes the product "good".

perhaps in an anarchy. in civilized societies,no.

Namecalling is a good sign of a lost argument.
--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Are you taking DimBulb lessons?

The purchase is perfectly legal; no anarchy at all.

Facts are facts. Your argument is no better than the leftist losers'.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

it IS anarchy; you would allow anything as long as "good" money is exchanged,no rules,anything goes. Societies DO have rules,and behaviors that are prohibited. smokers trample all over other people.They pollute the air,leave big messes,start fires.THOSE are FACTS.

you have no facts.just allegations.

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

You ARE related to DimBulb.

Is tobacco illegal? One word answer only: yes or no?

You're full of shit. You claim an inanimate object has morality. That IS moronic.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

another sure sign of a lost argument.

doesn't matter,it's still immoral.

more sign of a lost argument.
--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Hardly.
Says *you*. Who gives a crap about your silly religion (anti-smokerism)? Fortunately you're in the minority. Unfortunately there are millions of others just itching to take away more of *your* liberties. ...and you don't care. Sad.

No, it's a statement of fact. I can't help it if you're stupid.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Definitely.
you obviously don't know what "religion" is.

"Minority"?? to use your own word;Hardly. The public favors anti-smoking laws.

It is no "liberty" to pollute the air,litter the outdoors,and raise healthcare costs for everyone.SOCIETY has it's rules.

More sign of a lost argument.
--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Which of course is not what you were arguing. The response was to the immorality of tobacco. You suggested that just because "good money" (whatever that is) was spent that tobacco by definition was a good thing. Econ only talks to the utility of the people involved and doesn't make any moral (or heck even legal) distinctions.
--
I get off on '57 Chevys
I get off on screamin' guitars
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Of course it is. Just because you refuse to understand...

Tobacco *CANNOT* be immoral, any more than your car is immoral. They are inanimate objects.

i.e. no fraud involved; everyone is playing above-board here...

Both people in the transaction both benefited. It was good for them, yes.

Wow! He gets it (even though he claims not to).
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I have come to the conclusion that we weren't discussing the same thing, even though be both obviously thought we were. Which probably explains why neither thought the other was getting it.. probably because neither of us was...
--
I get off on '57 Chevys
I get off on screamin' guitars
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Tobacco has utility/value, which is *makes* it good (at least in the mind of the purchaser). Tobacco is inanimate so it cannot have morals of any sort. Whether you wish to place a moral value on it is *your* issue and has nothing to do with the "morality of tobacco".
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

the production and USE of tobacco is immoral. It's poison,and not just for the users.It affects everybody. (whether they recognize it or not...) It even affects wildlife.

Ah,ANYTHING goes,if it's "aboveboard".... = anarchy.

Not really. they suffer poor health,higher medical costs,live shorter lifetimes. but it's also bad for -everyone- else. Thus,society has reasonable cause to regulate or prohibit it.

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

IT is not immoral, as you claimed it was. There is a *big* difference.
To you perhaps it is immoral. It obviously isn't against society's morays.

Lots of things are dangerous. Unless you propose to ban them all, you're nothing better than the leftists you hate so much.

Bullshit. No more than *many* other things that I'm sure you find perfectly acceptable. The *fact* is that you're no better than those on the left you hate.

Hogwash.
Illegal <> "above board"
Get out of the leftists gutter.

Ah, so you *DO* support banning everything you deem to be "dangerous". You *are* a statist.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Another false presumption; that if one bans anything,then they must ban everything.

Ah,denial.(just -more- denial,actually)

then in your view,anything that is "legal" is thus not immoral. screwy. (that would make YOU "pro-choice" and pro-GLBT)

Ooh,again,"statist,statist",I'm SO hurt.....
--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

First they came for the Jews...

Bullshit.

Morality is personal. SOme morality, when it's universal is codified. You propose that smoking is universally immoral, which is asinine.

I can't help it if you *are* what you hate. That's the plain truth.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Nonsense. The JEWS are a People and a religion(and harm no one),while smoking is a nasty,bad behavior(harming many). there's a big difference. A smoker can live without smoking.Live better,actually.

No,truth.
Sure it is; it poisons,pollutes,starts fires,has no redeeming value. It's disgusting behavior,socially unacceptable. It not only negatively affects the smoker,but those around them.

Ooh,now I'm a "hater".....sounds like the homos argument...
--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.