On The Insider: Britney's Bikini-Clad Top 10
BNET Business Network:
BNET
TechRepublic
ZDNet
TalkBack 22 of 34:
Next »
« Previous
Faux naif argument
I disagree about whether confiscating all potential vendors' IP is necessary for "transparency" in government. But that requires a longer discussion.

Just wanted to say now that I think the Supreme Court used sophistry when it claimed that the Federal Congress does not coerce States and even libraries when Federal funds have strings attached.

After all, the Court argues, these organizations can always turn down the money.

That's essential money, without which programs would die. Yes, doing less for the public is always an option. The same way quitting a job is always an option. But that in no way equalizes the power difference between the one with the money and the one without.

You reminded me of thatsophistry when you said no company need ever bid for a government contract. I think that part of your argument is weak.
Government has too much money, and government purchases mean too much to total possible revenues for the option not to bid to mean much.

A demand a government makes on bidders is in actuality a demand it makes on an industry.

MTC
Posted by: Anton Philidor   Posted on: 11/04/05 You are currently: a Guest | Members login | Terms of Use
Reply to Story Reply to Message

Alert moderator to an offensive message

Subscribe to this discussion via Email or RSS

Go straight to the blood test  John Zern | 11/03/05
Depending on the test..  Patrick Jones | 11/04/05
How do you think they test the blood?  Sir_Chancealot | 11/04/05
You can't force a blood test  bidemytime | 11/04/05
Yes  Real World | 11/04/05
This varies by state  archerjoe | 11/04/05
Actually, you can (but you shouldn't)  cdgoldin | 11/04/05
Cautionary tale from my state  bidemytime | 11/04/05
Good choice!  cdgoldin | 11/04/05
More like a fairtale  DarthRidiculous | 11/06/05
Before you go and begin believing in your rights  rhavyn | 11/04/05
Blood Test required???  BernieLyons | 11/04/05
Yes you do in NJ  DarthRidiculous | 11/06/05
I don't feel like doing that...that would hurt...  Grayson Peddie | 11/04/05
Technical information on devices used to convict someone must be public!  Root User | 11/04/05
Does the device work as intended?  Anton Philidor | 11/04/05
Sorry, I disagree.  Root User | 11/04/05
When a device must be accurate...  Anton Philidor | 11/04/05
States are interested in convictions, not accuracy  rhavyn | 11/04/05
The Courts worked...  Anton Philidor | 11/04/05
Just don't rely on the courts every time  rhavyn | 11/04/05
Faux naif argument  Anton Philidor | 11/04/05
I disagree  Real World | 11/04/05
What happened to testing?  salmon | 11/04/05
Yes and no.  Dr_Zinj | 11/04/05
finally somebody thinking "lowtech"  bongo_z | 11/04/05
Ivory tower thinking  cdgoldin | 11/04/05
Accurate?  HiRezL | 11/07/05
Forgot to mention...  cdgoldin | 11/04/05
Voting Machine are as Important  jtmort | 11/04/05
Not true, properly designed voting procedures will  Update victim | 11/04/05
But what if ...  cdgoldin | 11/04/05
They can and do force blood test  rhavyn | 11/04/05
Driving NOT a privilege  WCarlS | 11/04/05

What do you think?

SponsoredWhite Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads