Why Linux is not (yet) ready for the desktop

[Brian Fahrlander]

Graham Todd wrote:
> On Sat, 06 Jun 2009 20:34:11 -0500
> Brian Fahrlander <wheeldweller at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>   
>>     Some people claim capitalism is greedy; well, "greed", the hope
>> that by working harder you might make more money is a very, very
>> important thing. You wouldn't want your daughter to marry a man
>> without it.
>>     
> [snipped]
>
> My daughter did, and she's happier now than she's ever been.
>   
    You can have no ambition in Britian; they call it socialism. It's a 
popular thing, being sold as a panacea of pleasure...it's really not. 
Since world war 2, America's growth has been something like 10% larger 
than European nations. Tons of things were created or enhanced by 
American technology and/or innovation. How can anyone forget the 
post-war boom?

    But in places where they wait for the government to provide 
all...you can never really be safe, now, can ya? Time and again those 
depending on others to survive have had the longer poverty, the harder 
life. Just popped into my head was the scene from Excalibur (1980) where 
they country people were impoverished and starving when the nights were 
gone. Sure, the castle was well provisioned; the people ran around 
hungry at 80 pounds, moaning.

    I'm just not ready to discard decades...perhaps a couple of 
centuries of how one doing his own thing and culturally making leftovers 
available to his fellow man can be outclassed by the people we were JUST 
joking about, paying $600 for a toilet seat. The same people building 
bridges to nowhere, and spending money like a drunken congressmen (to 
the long-awaited relief of drunken seamen, everywhere.)

   In short; why would we trust something not smart enough to get in out 
of the rain?
> But, on reflection, I think my reaction to Fahrlander's remarks may be
> caused by my cultural differences with the US.  Here in the UK, we have
> a system (a tad eroded) in which every person (man, woman and child) is
> taken care of from the cradle to the grave.  I applaud it.  We have a
> National Health Service that gives free treatment to all at the point
> of need, and which no government of any political persuasion would
> end.  No doubt this would send Fahrlander apoplectic!
>
>   
    Well, we do, too.  We accept *anyone* who comes into an emergency room.

    The problem is, when John Q. Public arrives with federally-backed 
Medicare (or is it Medicade?) funding, things that cost $500 wind up 
being re-imbursed by that supposedly philanthropic federal organization 
with $38.  That's why aspirins cost the rest of us $8.

    The health system, just like the banking system, has been crushed by 
Congress. Had they intended to HELP healthcare, they would pay the going 
rate for such things. Instead, they underfunded, intentionally.  Later 
with hospitals becoming empty properties, they'll swoop in as if they 
didn't crush the hospital and decide to buy it! "We'll save the day! 
Trust Us!"

    Then, having killed off the free-standing hospitals who have, and 
will take anyone, won't take ANYONE until it's their turn.  Broken 
arm...what do Canadians wait now, siz weeks?  That's not better.
> I have no problem with the philosophical position of Christianity, and
> often like to enter into philosophical debates with Christians (living
> in Canterbury, Kent, where the magnificent mediaeval cathedral also
> resides, means that I am in the nexus of pilgrims from all religions
> with which I can have these debates).  However, I have a real problem
> with a nation that elevates religion to the standing of a political
> movement (the US is not the only one I should add), and equating God
> with Mammon.  I was always brought up to believe that God and Mammon
> were on opposing sides, but that's perhaps my cultural bias.
>
>   
    You really need to spend more time here. There's a very good reason 
why so much argument goes on about religion here: it's dying. Much like 
the areas of London becoming run by Sharia Law, Christians here are 
trying to keep it a part of our nature as it's been since our founding.

    Sorry; I went to government school; who's Mammon?
> Having now explained that this 63 year old has different values to
> Fahrlander, and I suspect most of his audience does, can I observe that
> I am not going to change him through argument, nor he I.  So can we now
> end this diatribe and get back to the matter in the Subject of this
> post and not hijack it any longer?
>
>   
    Well, and that's what I mentioned on an earlier message (one you 
might not have had chance to read yet). Our views do, and should, change 
with new information- both of us.  Nothing in your posts suggest to me 
your knuckles drag the ground.  :)  But like you, I think this 
discussion would be better off elsewhere.

-- 
 ------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Brian Fahrländer                 Christian, Conservative, and Technomad
 Evansville, IN                                                         
 ICQ: 5119262                         AOL/Yahoo/GoogleTalk: WheelDweller
 ------------------------------------------------------------------------