Chris wrote:

> Still not addressing my point. Ad hominems are a clear admission that
> you don't have an argument.

I repeat:
The issue has _nothing_ to do with _why_ the government spied on us.
The only thing you need to know is we weren't accused of a crime.

>> The issue has _nothing_ to do with _why_ the government spied on us.
>
> They didn't.

That assessment of yours is your right, but it ignores the salient facts:
1. The 4th amendment exists, and it exists for a reason, and,
2. The government obtained location data on millions of people
who were not accused of a crime.

>> The only thing you need to know is we weren't accused of a crime.
>
> Strawman. This wasn't a law enforcement exercise.

WTF?

That's the entire point.
And you dismiss it?

The entire point is that the government obtained location data on millions
of people who were not accused of a crime.

If you dismiss that point, then you wiped out the 4th amendment.

>> The fact you don't get this, after what.... scores of explanations,
>
> Links to articles are not explanations.

Jesus Christ Chris. You're getting like Alan Baker.
What the heck is wrong with your brain?

I spent a lot of effort _summarizing_ each and every link I posted.
And you missed it?

WTF?
There's no way to carry on an intelligent conversation with you.
You deny every fact that exists simply because you don't like it.

You deny that it even exists.
And yet it does.

> Everything else you've provided
> is either vague rhetoric, opinions or whataboutisms. None have been
> explanations. For someone so enamoured with facts you've been devoid of
> them in this thread.

Jesus Christ, Chris.
That's it. You deny all facts. Why? You don't like them.

I understand you.
You're no different than Alan Baker is.

That's it. I'm done with you in this thread.
You denied every fact that exists.

How can anyone carry an adult conversation with you when every fact that
was presented not only do you deny outright, but you deny the fact exists?
--
I don't care iKooks are child-like with a low-IQ, no education & low self
esteem; but due to that, they're so DK confident in always ignoring facts.

Chris wrote:

>> Did you look up the Long Island Railroad Retirement Disability Benefits
>> yet?
>
> Why is it the government's fault that people committed fraud against it?

Jesus Christ Chris.

Stop being Alan Baker's clone by denying all facts without even reading the
references first.

It was the government who committed the fraud.
It wouldn't have worked otherwise.

Read the references I provided.
Luckily, _other_ parts of the government found the fraud.

It was an "inside job", which is why it was so huge.
It costs the taxpayers a billion dollars in fraud.

Every penny was waste.
--
*Investigators probe how and why a disability pension was awarded*
*to nearly every LIRR employee who asked for one*
<https://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/local/fbi-arrest-corruption-long-island-rail-road-pension-scandal-taxpayer/1931848/>
*Twenty-Third Defendant Pleads Guilty In LIRR Disability Fraud Scheme*
<https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdny/pr/twenty-third-defendant-pleads-guilty-lirr-disability-fraud-scheme>
*Long Island Railroad Workers Scam $1 Billion in Disability Benefits*
<https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/long-island-railroad-workers-scam-1-billion-in-disability-benefits>
*Fighting Disability Fraud: How the Long Island Railroad Could Be a Model
for All Employers, USLAW Magazine*
<https://www.goldbergsegalla.com/news-and-knowledge/knowledge/fighting-disability-fraud-how-the-long-island-railroad-could-be-a-model-for-all-employers-uslaw-magazine>
*Arrests Made In Alleged $1 Billion Disability Scheme On Long Island*
<https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2011/10/27/141763550/arrests-made-in-alleged-1-billion-disability-scheme-on-long-island>

Chris wrote:

> No. Your point was that 80% government spending is wasted. You've yet to
> prove your point. I take it you can't.

I gave you facts (via multiple reliable references) that _every_ penny
spent on disability for one part of the government was fraud perpetuated
_by_ the government (every single penny!) which is 100% waste in that
specific example.

Why don't _you_ respond with references, Chris?

Give me _one_ reference that backs up your point of view, Chris.
*Name just one*

>> When there is no oversight, money is wasted left and right.
>> This isn't a hard concept for an adult to understand, Chris.
>
> But you've not shown it be a systematic problem. Yes all governments have
> had problems, but so has business. In far more damaging ways. Just look at
> the 2008 financial crisis: 100% caused by business. It ruined the lives
> across the world for nearly a decade.

I give you references, and you give back, in return, only bullshit.
*50 Examples of Government Waste*
<https://www.heritage.org/budget-and-spending/report/50-examples-government-waste>
"It is evident that Washington loses hundreds of billions of dollars
annually on spending that most Americans would certainly
consider wasteful."

Here's another well-sourced reference for you to deny exists, Chris:
*Wasteful spending list*
<https://posey.house.gov/wasteful-spending/>

And it's not just the US government who has little oversight on waste:
*Active & passive waste in [Italian] government spending*
<https://www.jstor.org/stable/25592509>

The whole world has lack of oversight in government waste, Chris:
*Waste in government expenditures*
<https://blogs.worldbank.org/governance/waste-in-government-expenditures>
"For example, the Federal Government paid out benefits totaling more
than $180 million to approximately 20,000 Americans who were dead;
paid more than $230 million in benefits to approximately 14,000
fugitive felons, who are not eligible for benefits"

(Although just those numbers were a small percentage of the budget.)

In fact, waste is a key component of the world economy:
*Toward a political economy of government waste*
<https://www.jstor.org/stable/976766>

I doubt _anyone_ knows the total percentage though, least of all you
(simply because you deny any and all facts about waste even exist).

Andy Burnelli <spam@nospam.com> wrote:
> Chris wrote:
>
>>> Did you look up the Long Island Railroad Retirement Disability Benefits
>>> yet?
>>
>> Why is it the government's fault that people committed fraud against it?
>
> Jesus Christ Chris.
>
> Stop being Alan Baker's clone by denying all facts without even reading the
> references first.
>
> It was the government who committed the fraud.

No it wasn't. It was people colluding together to subvert the system.

> It wouldn't have worked otherwise.
>
> Read the references I provided.
> Luckily, _other_ parts of the government found the fraud.
>
> It was an "inside job", which is why it was so huge.
> It costs the taxpayers a billion dollars in fraud.

The US federal budget is trillions per year. You've got a long way to go
before you hit 80% waste.

> Every penny was waste.

It's arguable whether fraud is waste. It's illegal activity. The fraudsters
will likely have their assets taken.

Chris wrote:

>> It was the government who committed the fraud.
>
> No it wasn't. It was people colluding together to subvert the system.

WTF?
Other than the doctors perhaps, those people worked for the government.

The point is the lack of oversight allowed this huge waste to occur.
And many others (did you see the listing?).

What's your proof that the waste is NOT occurring?
(HINT: You're acting like Alan Baker, who is plonked by everyone but sms).

> The US federal budget is trillions per year. You've got a long way to go
> before you hit 80% waste.

Why are you acting like Alan Baker?
What's your assessment of the waste, Chris?

What percentage are you claiming that the government wastes, Chris?
And why?

>> Every penny was waste.
>
> It's arguable whether fraud is waste. It's illegal activity. The fraudsters
> will likely have their assets taken.

The 4th amendment issue here is simple, even as it's beyond your grasp.

The government actively sought and obtained and reviewed location data on
millions of people who were not accused of having committed a crime.

Andy Burnelli <spam@nospam.com> wrote:
> Chris wrote:
>
>> No. Your point was that 80% government spending is wasted. You've yet to
>> prove your point. I take it you can't.
>
> I gave you facts (via multiple reliable references) that _every_ penny
> spent on disability for one part of the government was fraud perpetuated
> _by_ the government (every single penny!) which is 100% waste in that
> specific example.

Not 100% waste.
http://archive.longislandpress.com/2011/10/27/feds-arrest-10-in-lirr-pension-probe/

> Why don't _you_ respond with references, Chris?
>
> Give me _one_ reference that backs up your point of view, Chris.
> *Name just one*

Federal spending is $4Tr you've still got $3 trillion of waste to find.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_federal_budget

>>> When there is no oversight, money is wasted left and right.
>>> This isn't a hard concept for an adult to understand, Chris.
>>
>> But you've not shown it be a systematic problem. Yes all governments have
>> had problems, but so has business. In far more damaging ways. Just look at
>> the 2008 financial crisis: 100% caused by business. It ruined the lives
>> across the world for nearly a decade.
>
> I give you references,

The references are not about government waste.

and you give back, in return, only bullshit.
> *50 Examples of Government Waste*
> <https://www.heritage.org/budget-and-spending/report/50-examples-government-waste>
> "It is evident that Washington loses hundreds of billions of dollars
> annually on spending that most Americans would certainly
> consider wasteful."
>
> Here's another well-sourced reference for you to deny exists, Chris:
> *Wasteful spending list*
> <https://posey.house.gov/wasteful-spending/>
>
> And it's not just the US government who has little oversight on waste:
> *Active & passive waste in [Italian] government spending*
> <https://www.jstor.org/stable/25592509>
>
> The whole world has lack of oversight in government waste, Chris:
> *Waste in government expenditures*
> <https://blogs.worldbank.org/governance/waste-in-government-expenditures>
> "For example, the Federal Government paid out benefits totaling more
> than $180 million to approximately 20,000 Americans who were dead;
> paid more than $230 million in benefits to approximately 14,000
> fugitive felons, who are not eligible for benefits"
>
> (Although just those numbers were a small percentage of the budget.)

your examples are all <0.1% of the annual budget. That seems like a highly
effective system. Is business that efficient?

> In fact, waste is a key component of the world economy:
> *Toward a political economy of government waste*
> <https://www.jstor.org/stable/976766>
>
> I doubt _anyone_ knows the total percentage though, least of all you
> (simply because you deny any and all facts about waste even exist).

I never denied waste exists. I denied it was 80% and I wanted you to
evidence it. Your post hoc googling hasn't changed my mind.

You're arguing for more oversight which I agree is a good thing, but that
requires a larger government and more taxes, however.

Chris wrote:

> I never denied waste exists. I denied it was 80% and I wanted you to
> evidence it. Your post hoc googling hasn't changed my mind.

For you to claim government waste is absolutely nothing is preposterous.

Andy Burnelli <spam@nospam.com> wrote:
> Chris wrote:
>
>>> It was the government who committed the fraud.
>>
>> No it wasn't. It was people colluding together to subvert the system.
>
> WTF?
> Other than the doctors perhaps, those people worked for the government.
>
> The point is the lack of oversight allowed this huge waste to occur.
> And many others (did you see the listing?).
>
> What's your proof that the waste is NOT occurring?
> (HINT: You're acting like Alan Baker, who is plonked by everyone but sms).
>
>> The US federal budget is trillions per year. You've got a long way to go
>> before you hit 80% waste.
>
> Why are you acting like Alan Baker?
> What's your assessment of the waste, Chris?
>
> What percentage are you claiming that the government wastes, Chris?
> And why?
>
>>> Every penny was waste.
>>
>> It's arguable whether fraud is waste. It's illegal activity. The fraudsters
>> will likely have their assets taken.
>
> The 4th amendment issue here is simple, even as it's beyond your grasp.
>
> The government actively sought and obtained and reviewed location data on
> millions of people who were not accused of having committed a crime.
>

Looks like the CDC is not alone in spying on innocent American citizens.
There are undoubtedly more too.

https://www.yahoo.com/now/immigration-officials-spying-majority-americans-221742740.html

Just the mere fact that separate agencies are spending billions of dollars
to go the same thing is waste and abuse, never mind the privacy overreach
going on.

badgolferman wrote:

> Looks like the CDC is not alone in spying on innocent American citizens.
> There are undoubtedly more too.
>
> https://www.yahoo.com/now/immigration-officials-spying-majority-americans-221742740.html
>
> Just the mere fact that separate agencies are spending billions of dollars
> to go the same thing is waste and abuse, never mind the privacy overreach
> going on.

Hi badgolferman,

While your subject was about the CDC, I also quoted, early on, multiple
_other_ government agencies collecting location data of people who are not
accused of a crime. So we agree that it's not just the CDC doing this.

Interestingly, the fact Steve and Chris are desperately attempting to
justify the CDC spying in terms of Covid means their argument is hollow, as
they have to fabricate a _different_ justification now for the immigration
agency you've just uncovered and the two agencies I've already uncovered.

That means they need to fabricate excuses for _four_ agencies (and
counting), where it's just like what the iKooks do when they fabricate a
_different_ excuse for Apple's flaws (when there's really only one reason).

They don't realize they have to fabricate a _different_ argument for _each_
government agency, where the real problem has nothing to do with _why_ each
agency is performing mass surveillance. The real problem is that they are.

Yours would be the _fourth_ agency caught spying on us, where, taking a
peek at your reference (if you provide a reference, I'll _read_ it)...
*Immigration officials created network that can spy on majority of Americans*
https://www.yahoo.com/now/immigration-officials-spying-majority-americans-221742740.html
"ICE spent an estimated $2.8 billion between 2008 and 2021
on surveillance, data collection and data-sharing initiatives
capable of tracking almost anyone, seemingly at any time.
ICE has ramped up its surveillance capacities in near-complete
secrecy and impunity, sidestepping limitations and flying under
the radar of lawmakers.

The result is anyone's information can end up in the hands of
immigration enforcement simply because they've applied for
driver's licenses, driven on the roads or signed up with their
local utilities to get access to heat, water and electricity.

The agency has collected data on hundreds of millions of Americans
largely without much oversight or accountability, often crossing
legal and ethical lines to amass people's personal information
to weave a vast surveillance system."

Their reach is vast!
"ICE has driver's license data for 3 in 4 adults living in the U.S.;
has scanned at least 1 in 3 of all adults' driver's licenses with
face recognition technology; can track the movement of vehicles
in cities that are home to nearly 3 in 4 adults; and can locate
3 in 4 adults through their utility records.

Worse...
In California, Gov. Gavin Newsom signed a bill in 2020 that promised
to protect utility customer data from exposure to federal immigration
officials. But ICE officials found a way around the law, purchasing
access to hundreds of millions of Americans' utility records provided
by data brokers Thomson Reuters and Equifax."

Where the article concluded:
"That they have been able to build such an expansive infrastructure
in relative secrecy is setting an alarming example for how federal
agencies can evade scrutiny."

And, after all, oversight is what is lacking in government.
--
I agree with any logical & rational point of view, no matter from whom.

Andy Burnelli <spam@nospam.com> wrote:
> Chris wrote:
>
>>> It was the government who committed the fraud.
>>
>> No it wasn't. It was people colluding together to subvert the system.
>
> WTF?
> Other than the doctors perhaps, those people worked for the government.

Doctors are employed by the hospital or general practice. They aren't by
any stretch of the imagination - apart from yours - "the government".

> The point is the lack of oversight allowed this huge waste to occur.
> And many others (did you see the listing?).

Still not even close to 80%. Not even 8%.

> What's your proof that the waste is NOT occurring?
> (HINT: You're acting like Alan Baker, who is plonked by everyone but sms).

LOL. You're seriously asking me to prove a negative? Who's the idiot now?

The onus is on you to support your assertion. Stop wiggling.

>> The US federal budget is trillions per year. You've got a long way to go
>> before you hit 80% waste.
>
> Why are you acting like Alan Baker?
> What's your assessment of the waste, Chris?

No system as complex as government institutions will be 100% perfect. If
you layer politics and people's opinions on top then "perfection" is
impossible to define.

Can governments do better? Of course they can. Is this a reason to
denigrate everything they do? Not even close.

> What percentage are you claiming that the government wastes, Chris?
> And why?
>
>>> Every penny was waste.
>>
>> It's arguable whether fraud is waste. It's illegal activity. The fraudsters
>> will likely have their assets taken.
>
> The 4th amendment issue here is simple, even as it's beyond your grasp.
>
> The government actively sought and obtained and reviewed location data on
> millions of people who were not accused of having committed a crime.

Not people. Individual datapoints which may or may not be directly linked
to a person. The data are legally obtained from people willingly.

Why is the government breaking the 4th amendment and not the companies
collecting and selling the data? Double-standards?

The government routinely collect data and use data for many, many reasons.
Perfectly legally and perfectly reasonably. Do you have a problem with that
too?

Andy Burnelli <spam@nospam.com> wrote:
> Chris wrote:
>
>> I never denied waste exists. I denied it was 80% and I wanted you to
>> evidence it. Your post hoc googling hasn't changed my mind.
>
> For you to claim government waste is absolutely nothing is preposterous.

Try reading what I wrote again. Putting words in my mouth might make you
feel better, but you're lying.

On 2022-05-12 9:56 a.m., Chris wrote:
> Andy Burnelli <spam@nospam.com> wrote:
>> Chris wrote:
>>
>>> I never denied waste exists. I denied it was 80% and I wanted you to
>>> evidence it. Your post hoc googling hasn't changed my mind.
>>
>> For you to claim government waste is absolutely nothing is preposterous.
>
> Try reading what I wrote again. Putting words in my mouth might make you
> feel better, but you're lying.
>

And lying is his modus operandi.

Chris wrote:

>>> I never denied waste exists. I denied it was 80% and I wanted you to
>>> evidence it. Your post hoc googling hasn't changed my mind.
>>
>> For you to claim government waste is absolutely nothing is preposterous.
>
> Try reading what I wrote again. Putting words in my mouth might make you
> feel better, but you're lying.

Try again, Chris, given there's a reason I said that.
All you're doing is using up childish arguments that you purchased.

How many times have I asked you to back up your claims and yet you haven't?
What do _you_ think the average percentage of government waste is, Chris?

Chris wrote:

>> Other than the doctors perhaps, those people worked for the government.
>
> Doctors are employed by the hospital or general practice. They aren't by
> any stretch of the imagination - apart from yours - "the government".

I said _other_ than the doctors, Chris.
The fact you tried to pull that means you have no facts of your own.

> LOL. You're seriously asking me to prove a negative?

If you think waste is in the negative percentages, then you're wrong.

> No system as complex as government institutions will be 100% perfect.

It's not even close to perfect, Chris, and, IMHO, the waste is horrendous.

Pick a percentage you think it is, but I picked a high percentage to make
the point that the amount of government waste is, IMHO, astronomical.

> Why is the government breaking the 4th amendment and not the companies
> collecting and selling the data? Double-standards?

You need to comprehend that the government is held to the 4th amendment.
The government has the power to jail & execute you, Chris.

> The government routinely collect data and use data for many, many reasons.

Our government has a prohibition on unreasonable collection of that data.

On 2022-05-12 10:41 a.m., Andy Burnelli wrote:
> Chris wrote:
>
>>>> I never denied waste exists. I denied it was 80% and I wanted you to
>>>> evidence it. Your post hoc googling hasn't changed my mind.
>>>
>>> For you to claim government waste is absolutely nothing is preposterous.
>>
>> Try reading what I wrote again. Putting words in my mouth might make you
>> feel better, but you're lying.
>
> Try again, Chris, given there's a reason I said that.

A "reason" that you don't then articulate...

> All you're doing is using up childish arguments that you purchased.
>
> How many times have I asked you to back up your claims and yet you haven't?

So... ...exactly like you!

> What do _you_ think the average percentage of government waste is, Chris?

On 2022-05-12 10:47 a.m., Andy Burnelli wrote:
> Chris wrote:
>
>>> Other than the doctors perhaps, those people worked for the government.
>>
>> Doctors are employed by the hospital or general practice. They aren't by
>> any stretch of the imagination - apart from yours - "the government".
>
> I said _other_ than the doctors, Chris.
> The fact you tried to pull that means you have no facts of your own.
>
>> LOL. You're seriously asking me to prove a negative?
>
> If you think waste is in the negative percentages, then you're wrong.

I thought you said you were "well-educated", but you don't know what to
"prove a negative" means in logic?

>
>> No system as complex as government institutions will be 100% perfect.
>
> It's not even close to perfect, Chris, and, IMHO, the waste is horrendous.
>
> Pick a percentage you think it is, but I picked a high percentage to make
> the point that the amount of government waste is, IMHO, astronomical.

And then you failed to support that percentage with...

....well, anything.

>
>> Why is the government breaking the 4th amendment and not the companies
>> collecting and selling the data? Double-standards?
>
> You need to comprehend that the government is held to the 4th amendment.
> The government has the power to jail & execute you, Chris.
>
>> The government routinely collect data and use data for many, many
>> reasons.
>
> Our government has a prohibition on unreasonable collection of that data.

On Thu, 12 May 2022 20:06:09 +1000, badgolferman
<REMOVETHISbadgolferman@gmail.com> wrote:

> Andy Burnelli <spam@nospam.com> wrote:
>> Chris wrote:
>>
>>>> It was the government who committed the fraud.
>>>
>>> No it wasn't. It was people colluding together to subvert the system.
>>
>> WTF?
>> Other than the doctors perhaps, those people worked for the government.
>>
>> The point is the lack of oversight allowed this huge waste to occur.
>> And many others (did you see the listing?).
>>
>> What's your proof that the waste is NOT occurring?
>> (HINT: You're acting like Alan Baker, who is plonked by everyone but
>> sms).
>>
>>> The US federal budget is trillions per year. You've got a long way to
>>> go
>>> before you hit 80% waste.
>>
>> Why are you acting like Alan Baker?
>> What's your assessment of the waste, Chris?
>>
>> What percentage are you claiming that the government wastes, Chris?
>> And why?
>>
>>>> Every penny was waste.
>>>
>>> It's arguable whether fraud is waste. It's illegal activity. The
>>> fraudsters
>>> will likely have their assets taken.
>>
>> The 4th amendment issue here is simple, even as it's beyond your grasp.
>>
>> The government actively sought and obtained and reviewed location data
>> on
>> millions of people who were not accused of having committed a crime.
>>
>
> Looks like the CDC is not alone in spying on innocent American citizens.
> There are undoubtedly more too.
>
> https://www.yahoo.com/now/immigration-officials-spying-majority-americans-221742740.html
>
> Just the mere fact that separate agencies are spending billions of
> dollars
> to go the same thing is waste and abuse, never mind the privacy overreach
> going on.

There is no privacy breach going on by the CDC, its ANONYMISED data.

Andy Burnelli <spam@nospam.com> wrote:
> Chris wrote:
>
>>> Other than the doctors perhaps, those people worked for the government.
>>
>> Doctors are employed by the hospital or general practice. They aren't by
>> any stretch of the imagination - apart from yours - "the government".
>
> I said _other_ than the doctors, Chris.

Sorry. I missed that.

I wouldn't call railroad workers "the government" either.

> The fact you tried to pull that means you have no facts of your own.
>
>> LOL. You're seriously asking me to prove a negative?
>
> If you think waste is in the negative percentages, then you're wrong.

You're asking me to prove there is no waste. Logically that's impossible.
Might want to read your book again.

>> No system as complex as government institutions will be 100% perfect.
>
> It's not even close to perfect, Chris, and, IMHO, the waste is horrendous.

So not a fact? You're opinion. Fine.

> Pick a percentage you think it is, but I picked a high percentage to make
> the point that the amount of government waste is, IMHO, astronomical.

That be your opinion. All your evidence says otherwise.

>> Why is the government breaking the 4th amendment and not the companies
>> collecting and selling the data? Double-standards?
>
> You need to comprehend that the government is held to the 4th amendment.
> The government has the power to jail & execute you, Chris.
>
>> The government routinely collect data and use data for many, many reasons.
>
> Our government has a prohibition on unreasonable collection of that data.

And we're back to that "unreasonable" word, again. In your own words how
was the CDC unreasonable in trying to research pandemic behaviour?

Andy Burnelli <spam@nospam.com> wrote:
> Chris wrote:
>
>>>> I never denied waste exists. I denied it was 80% and I wanted you to
>>>> evidence it. Your post hoc googling hasn't changed my mind.
>>>
>>> For you to claim government waste is absolutely nothing is preposterous.
>>
>> Try reading what I wrote again. Putting words in my mouth might make you
>> feel better, but you're lying.
>
> Try again, Chris, given there's a reason I said that.
> All you're doing is using up childish arguments that you purchased.
>
> How many times have I asked you to back up your claims and yet you haven't?

I haven't made a claim. I've asked to you evidence yours and to explain
exactly which laws the CDC has broken. You've yet to do either.

> What do _you_ think the average percentage of government waste is, Chris?

Less than 80%.

Am 12.05.22 um 21:38 schrieb lacksey:
>
> There is no privacy breach going on by the CDC, its ANONYMISED data.

Path:
eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!news.mixmin.net!news2.arglkargh.de!news.karotte.org!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: lacksey <lki567@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: misc.phone.mobile.iphone,comp.mobile.android,alt.privacy
Subject: Re: CDC Tracked Phones
Date: Fri, 13 May 2022 05:38:59 +1000
Lines: 54
Message-ID: <op.1l2l69gax9d686@pvr2.lan>
References: <t4u64p$kmb$1@dont-email.me> <t59brb$snm$1@dont-email.me>
<op.1lvoiitnc5duzs@pvr2.lan> <t5a54j$s55$1@dont-email.me>
<t5a7q3$a1c$2@dont-email.me> <t5a8d6$e9h$1@dont-email.me>
<t5bhgh$vvc$1@dont-email.me> <t5bv00$gfi$1@dont-email.me>
<t5c8kl$joe$1@dont-email.me> <t5dkkc$mba$1@dont-email.me>
<t5dr27$1osc$1@gioia.aioe.org> <t5e4tc$pqg$1@dont-email.me>
<t5e827$7re$1@gioia.aioe.org> <t5eqn7$5kt$1@dont-email.me>
<t5er0r$1rj8$1@gioia.aioe.org> <t5fmtu$r1d$1@dont-email.me>
<t5g9at$oeo$1@gioia.aioe.org> <t5gskc$d37$1@dont-email.me>
<t5hlps$1eoc$1@gioia.aioe.org> <t5im6g$in2$1@dont-email.me>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15; format=flowed; delsp=yes
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Trace: individual.net buGGMxBhj/gLPsuWgPaiigZfrP9Jlk1Gs0dYRNLuTQcKmAmY0=
Cancel-Lock: sha1:KZSUeTbPE7EJA2HFgrJVoNELjAs=
User-Agent: Opera Mail/1.0 (Win32)
Xref: reader02.eternal-september.org misc.phone.mobile.iphone:163046
comp.mobile.android:95136 alt.privacy:29196

Hi Rod Speed!
You are an absolute idiot and Troll!

--
De gustibus non est disputandum

Alan wrote:

> I thought you said you were "well-educated", but you don't know what to
> "prove a negative" means in logic?

I'll ask again and that's the last time.

I said what I think it is and you say that's wrong which is fine, but you
have to base your "wrong" on something, Chris. What?

What do _you_ think the average percentage of government waste is, Chris?

On 2022-05-12 1:13 p.m., Chris wrote:
> Andy Burnelli <spam@nospam.com> wrote:
>> Chris wrote:
>>
>>>> Other than the doctors perhaps, those people worked for the government.
>>>
>>> Doctors are employed by the hospital or general practice. They aren't by
>>> any stretch of the imagination - apart from yours - "the government".
>>
>> I said _other_ than the doctors, Chris.
>
> Sorry. I missed that.
>
> I wouldn't call railroad workers "the government" either.
>
>> The fact you tried to pull that means you have no facts of your own.
>>
>>> LOL. You're seriously asking me to prove a negative?
>>
>> If you think waste is in the negative percentages, then you're wrong.
>
> You're asking me to prove there is no waste. Logically that's impossible.
> Might want to read your book again.
>
>>> No system as complex as government institutions will be 100% perfect.
>>
>> It's not even close to perfect, Chris, and, IMHO, the waste is horrendous.
>
> So not a fact? You're opinion. Fine.
>
>> Pick a percentage you think it is, but I picked a high percentage to make
>> the point that the amount of government waste is, IMHO, astronomical.
>
> That be your opinion. All your evidence says otherwise.
>
>>> Why is the government breaking the 4th amendment and not the companies
>>> collecting and selling the data? Double-standards?
>>
>> You need to comprehend that the government is held to the 4th amendment.
>> The government has the power to jail & execute you, Chris.
>>
>>> The government routinely collect data and use data for many, many reasons.
>>
>> Our government has a prohibition on unreasonable collection of that data.
>
> And we're back to that "unreasonable" word, again. In your own words how
> was the CDC unreasonable in trying to research pandemic behaviour?

Whenever he's cornered, Arlen adds a qualifier to play the "no TRUE
Scotsman" game.

On 2022-05-12 2:07 p.m., Andy Burnelli wrote:
> Alan wrote:
>
>> I thought you said you were "well-educated", but you don't know what
>> to "prove a negative" means in logic?
>
> I'll ask again and that's the last time.
>
> I said what I think it is and you say that's wrong which is fine, but you
> have to base your "wrong" on something, Chris. What?

But your claim has always been that you state only facts, Arlen...

>
> What do _you_ think the average percentage of government waste is, Chris?

Chris wrote:

>> What do _you_ think the average percentage of government waste is, Chris?
>
> Less than 80%

That's all I wanted from you which was _your_ assessment of the waste.

I'll agree with you, pending more information, that of the money you pay in
taxes to the government, the result might actually be less than 80% waste.

On 2022-05-12 5:09 p.m., Andy Burnelli wrote:
> Chris wrote:
>
>>> What do _you_ think the average percentage of government waste is,
>>> Chris?
>>
>> Less than 80%
>
> That's all I wanted from you which was _your_ assessment of the waste.
>
> I'll agree with you, pending more information, that of the money you pay in
> taxes to the government, the result might actually be less than 80% waste.

But you lack the balls to make as definitive a statement.