Posted on 06/19/2002 7:47:42 PM PDT by Nitro
Does it count?
NewsAndOpinion.com | If someone does something wonderful, but didn't intend to, does it count? Should we see ourselves as blessed?
You say, "Williams, what are you talking about
OK. I'll bite.
Williams, what are you talking about?
Williams is so good that when he fills in for Rush I actually listen to that broadcast.
bump for WW
he speaks of truth, justice and the rights of man!!
Either that or the USA is lost in a mire of PC speak and weak-sisters!!
OK.
Williams, what are you talking about?Try this. In 1846, there were 735 U.S. whaling ships, 80 percent of the world's whaling fleet. American whalers killed an average of 15,000 whales per year, mostly to produce oil for lamps. By the time whaling dropped off, toward the end of the century, there were only 50,000 whales alive. Had whaling continued, there would be no whales today.
So, who was responsible for saving the whale from extinction? Was it Greenpeace? No, it was multimillionaire David Rockefeller, who successfully marketed kerosene, which took over the illumination market. Later, Thomas Edison's incandescent light bulb ran both whale oil and kerosene out of the illumination market.
1910 -- 12,301 1920 -- 11,369 1930 -- 39,300 1940 -- 37,709 1950 -- 45,060 1960 -- 63,616 1970 -- 42,254 1980 -- 3,401 1990 -- 655 2000 -- 1,343
Me too! I wish Williams had a show of his own.
This does not necessarily prove Willams example wrong. The example of the US's 18 whales makes his point. The 1,499 whales of the Japanese means we should drop another A-bomb on the "Land of the Rising Sun",to save the whales.
The article used "whaling" as a metaphor, not an actuality!!
No whales were killed in the writing of this article!!
The article used "whaling" as a metaphor, not an actuality!!
No whales were killed in the writing of this article!!
No misinterpretation on my part.
Walter Williams used whaling to illustrate a point.
Historical facts show that he's full of baloney.
Walter's claim to be a "conservative" is irrelvant if his credibility is shot.
He should strive to utilize more valid examples to communicate his ideas.
As it stands, Walter's presentation of economic theory is on a par with that of Miss Cleo.
Using Edison as an example, he marketed recording devices and electric lights. Both great things, Edison thought, for mankind. But recording devices led to the resignation of a President and leads to who knows how many breakups of marriages every day. Electric lights have nearly destroyed the night sky and we are supposed to be watching the lights in the sky for signs and seasons, and they also cause people to stay up all night and not get enough sleep.
Whether it is for purely selfish reasons or for altruistic purposes, doing wonderful things might not be so wonderful after all, although the odds are better if things are done for purely selfish reasons.
Tsk, tsk!!!
I expected better.
Ol' Walter is really walking on quicksand with his hypothesis.
In the end, he may be right despite his awkwardly incompetent example!
He could be right if he is looking out for his own enlightened self-interest, although as a person with tenure at a major university he has already taken care of his own act. Like most, he doesn't care about whales, he just likes the idea that there are whales somewhere, creatures who don't pay taxes and don't vote Democrat, and seem to be happy enough anyway.
The perfect drones for capitalist exploitation in institutions like SeaWorld Incorporated.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.