Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : Asia Forum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Chuck Bleakney who wrote (3890)	5/26/1998 7:30:00 PM
From: kormac	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 9980

Chuck, you sounded pretty good until I started reading about us having a purpose. Forget the purpose and forget your mission to other galaxies. Get back to reading Darwin and its modern synthesis. There is no purpose. And the theory of evolution can't be summed up crassly as the survival of the fittest. It is random variations that are introduced that is the key. The fittest then survive by definition. The fit in Korea need some today though. Lawrence Lindsay with Lou Dobbs tonight. He is astute. Lou always has him on when he needs an opinion on big issues. IMO. He mentioned the 12 trillion in Japanese savings accounts, Zeev's 2% thesis of keeping this market up through the summer. Mentioned the tug of war between Japan's Ministry of Finance and the Bank of Japan. Seppo

To: Chuck Bleakney who wrote (3890)	5/26/1998 7:32:00 PM
From: Lee Lichterman III	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 9980

You raise many good points but the answers are not politically correct. "The have nots" generally reproduce at a greater rate than "the haves" thus causing the majority to feel the haves should feed and cloth the have nots. In reference to your breeding traits point. We live now in a society where those that mother nature would have weeded out due to not being "of standard" to being the ones that multiply the most also. We think it is cute and news worthy that someone gets a 5-7 organ transplant and grows to have more messed up kids as well as those that cannot reproduce being artifically impregnated and having 3-7 kids at a time. No one is asking the long term effects to the gene pool. All we do is say isn't that sweet and send them free stuff and teddy bears. Then we complain because our insurance rates are high. Maybe by the year 2050 we will all be test tube babies. "Its not nice to fool mother nature" (old margerine commercial) I live in Boise Idaho and every week we hear about little Julieanne Purdhom who received 5 major organs. I know this is not politically correct and I will get slammed but is it so wrong to say "Hey Doctor, save her life, transplant the organs but tie her tubes while your in there"? No we say poor kid hope she grows up to have a big family of her own someday. I had a neighbor who was told as a teen she would have one severly retarded child out of every two. They were right. She had eight kids, 5 of them are being cared for with your taxes in homes. God bless America? Sorry, always been one of my pet peeves. PS - Why is it alright to completely rebuild people with enormous amounts of birth defects but it is morally wrong to clone intelligent healthy people?