Gotta love pharmaceutical giant Pfizer - Page 2 - Politics and War Forum

Forum Post / Reply
You must log in before you can post or reply to messages.
Re: Gotta love pharmaceutical giant Pfizer
Tuesday, November 24, 2009 5:43 AM on j-body.org
Quote:

Edited 936 time(s). Last edited Today 4:20 AM









Re: Gotta love pharmaceutical giant Pfizer
Tuesday, November 24, 2009 10:10 AM on j-body.org
Bill, you're just resorting to personal attacks now. Which is kinda funny, because that's usually Goodwrench's thing.



Re: Gotta love pharmaceutical giant Pfizer
Tuesday, November 24, 2009 10:49 AM on j-body.org
Moderate Voice of the People wrote:

Mr.Goodwrench-G.T. wrote:

Oh and a word of advice Billy, your title "of the People" is really false advertising, you may want to consider a revision.


I think it's a lot closer to the truth than you are capable of realizing


"Of the people" means everyone, not a select few. You on this thread accepts business taking over your property. That's your false advertising.

Quote:

But that's, of course, the problem I address when I pull down the pants of these threads and spank them so severely. Bad thread! Naughty thread!

Repeat that to yourself many times and you'll eventually believe it. But what ever makes you sleep at night.

Quote:

What lies between extremism and inaction is the middle, the moderate, the Pragmatist. He laughs at those who torture themselves at the extremes. He goes about his business in a careful, effective fashion, getting things done while extremists blow their wads on uselessness. He is America, and you are his Entertainment.

What's even more funny and intriguing as much as you claim to be laughing, here you are debating.
Your so called "extreme views" threads pulls you in like a fisherman reeling in a hungry Bass fish... .

ThatGuy85 wrote:

Bill, you're just resorting to personal attacks now. Which is kinda funny, because that's usually Goodwrench's thing.

Just calling it how I see it.


THE POLITICALLY INCORRECT ONE.

Re: Gotta love pharmaceutical giant Pfizer
Tuesday, November 24, 2009 10:56 AM on j-body.org
ThatGuy85 wrote:

Bill, you're just resorting to personal attacks now. Which is kinda funny, because that's usually Goodwrench's thing.

Well, you may feel that way...but I feel we've come to this juncture because of a resistance on Goodwench's part to absorb anything I've said. He's thus demonstrated some characteristics I've now chosen to flame him up for. Since no actual exchange of information is occurring, it's time to have some fun!

I'll be the first to admit I'm playfully slapping him around, much like a cat does with a mouse. The fundamental difference is this...I won't kill him when I tire of it




Edited 1 time(s). Last edited Tuesday, November 24, 2009 11:32 AM



Re: Gotta love pharmaceutical giant Pfizer
Tuesday, November 24, 2009 11:23 AM on j-body.org
Mr.Goodwrench-G.T. wrote:



You on this thread accepts business taking over your property. That's your false advertising.


Oh. Oops. Ya done went and got desperate again! I saw this undercurrent earlier, and while I have become accustomed to essentially ignoring your repetitive re-statements, this one I choose to address. Here's why: A futile attempt to brand me as some business-driven, unsympathetic demon of the common man is disingenuous. Pragmatically speaking, what I am doing here is touting the inevitable, legal, and thus inescapable aspects of Eminent Domain. This makes my actual position Pragmatic (please re-read the definition). I've actually taken no side at all.

To add some detail for all: this means that while I can readily see all sides of this argument, I need not take any one side in my acceptance of Eminent Domain's complete power. I know, it's hard for some of you to fully visualize this...our society teaches us to "take sides". This is part of my ongoing campaign here as well...to help you folks understand that one can actually have an effective position on a subject without throwing down and going to war from one or the other of the available extremes.

Did that make sense to any of you? It's a very important distinction, so pardon me for being quite so adamant about seeing to its complete comprehension. Please discuss.

P.S.: As I've demonstrated here, and as is fact, Eminent Domain is only rarely used to further business concerns, being typically used instead for governmentally-initiated and owned improvements that provide community improvements. As such, demonizing it as a tool of greedy business is mostly inaccurate. Further, when it IS used to assist business interests, it's typically only done so in the context of greater gain than loss to the community, thus negating much, if not all, of this demonization.



Edited not for clarity, but to give you something to make fun of [/sarcasm]








Edited 11 time(s). Last edited Tuesday, November 24, 2009 12:26 PM



Re: Gotta love pharmaceutical giant Pfizer
Tuesday, November 24, 2009 11:42 AM on j-body.org
Mr.Goodwrench-G.T. wrote:

Moderate Voice of the People wrote:

Mr.Goodwrench-G.T. wrote:

Oh and a word of advice Billy, your title "of the People" is really false advertising, you may want to consider a revision.


I think it's a lot closer to the truth than you are capable of realizing


"Of the people" means everyone, not a select few.



I know, our society teaches you to believe that you are part of a majority, but I feel you are not, based upon your continuous "the sky is falling!" positions. As such, the name I use here in War Forum may require some further explanation:

Moderate Voice of the People means that I am touting my concepts as the Moderate expression of our people. I'm not representing the Conservative voice, nor the Liberal voice, et al. Let's think back to English class, and how modifiers (in this case adjectives) are employed. Break it down:

The People have a voice. In fact, they have many voices, as they are many people, with diverse (unfortunately, not diverse enough!) opinions. The Voice I am attempting to represent is the Moderate one. As such, the name works, and works well within the framework of our language.





Re: Gotta love pharmaceutical giant Pfizer
Tuesday, November 24, 2009 12:40 PM on j-body.org
Mr.Goodwrench-G.T wrote:

What's even more funny and intriguing as much as you claim to be laughing, here you are debating.
Your so called "extreme views" threads pulls you in like a fisherman reeling in a hungry Bass fish... .[

Oh, no doubt...I've learned that unless you can hear me laughing, it has little impact, and even less satisfaction, for me. I can debate through a guffaw. I'll keep spanking naughty threads. It's humiliating, I know, to be depantsed and abused in public. But it keeps you coming back for more, so I'm OK with it

However, lest you get too smarmy, let's clarify an important distinction: this is not debate. I gave up on you with "debate" some time ago, for you don't embrace other points of view, you just piss on them. No one that's watched you for any amount of time would argue this. You're don't come here to Debate. You come to Berate, and anyone who doesn't agree that your teapot tempests are worthy of World Consternation can be damned. Perhaps you've become accustomed to pliable, easy targets. I am here now...your quest just got way more difficult.

Conversely...Am I here to debate? Arguably yes, for I'm here furthering a point of view that's been all but lost in the WWF-style political follies that today pass for "discourse". I refuse to get worked up over weak attempts of Media Manipulation of my emotions. They can't get in. I won't let them.

I'm trying to show a different point of view. Am I succeeding? This is indeed Debatable...




Re: Gotta love pharmaceutical giant Pfizer
Tuesday, November 24, 2009 12:43 PM on j-body.org
The EDIT button is your friend.



Re: Gotta love pharmaceutical giant Pfizer
Tuesday, November 24, 2009 12:44 PM on j-body.org
^You love that edit button, don't ya? Just say it, and get it over with, it is just a message board.
Oh and switch your name one more time, one day you'll get it right.

Pragmatic Voice of Many wrote:

Mr.Goodwrench-G.T. wrote:



You on this thread accepts business taking over your property. That's your false advertising.


Oh. Oops. Ya done went and got desperate again! I saw this undercurrent earlier, and while I am used to your repetitive re-statements, this one I choose to address.

1. Not as desperate as when you started using "Mr.Goodwench" right?
2. Quote me right, missing words is and replying to those missing words and is just diverting and tip-toeing out to align to something else.
3. See what I wrote before on re-statement.

Quote:

A futile attempt to brand me as some business-driven, unsympathetic demon is disingenuous. Pragmatically speaking, what I am doing here is touting the inevitable, legal, and thus inescapable aspects of Eminent Domain. This makes my actual position Pragmatic (please re-read the definition).


As much as you want to claim: "touting the inevitable legal, and thus inescapable aspects of Eminent Domain." You still fail to see what dialogue is about. This happen/ed and one talks about it. You don't like it GTFO, it is just that simple. No? Furthermore it is inevitable only when you don't have the capitals to fight it. Hence why this will never happen where Oprah Winfrey, Bill Gates, or Bob Lutz live. And since you claim that you're now pragmatic, then why don't you follow what you preach? Because being pragmatic and "touting the inevitable, legal, and thus inescapable aspects of Eminent Domain" do not go hand in hand.

Quote:

To add some detail for all: this means that while I can readily see all sides of this argument, I need not take any one of them in my acceptance of Eminent Domain's complete power. I know, it's hard for some of you to fully visualize this...our society teaches us to "take sides". This is part of my ongoing campaign here as well...to help you folks understand that one can actually have an effective position on a subject without throwing down and going to war from one or the other of the available extremes.

Hypocrisy at it's finest or did you forgot what you're doing here.

Quote:

P.S.: As I've demonstrated here, and as is fact, Eminent Domain is only rarely used to further business concerns, being typically used instead for governmentally-initiated and owned improvements. As such, demonizing it as a tool of greedy business is mostly inaccurate.

With thousand empty property around the nation, the fact that business can displace a occupied residence is greed. No excuse.

Moderate Voice of the People wrote:

Mr.Goodwrench-G.T. wrote:

Moderate Voice of the People wrote:

Mr.Goodwrench-G.T. wrote:

Oh and a word of advice Billy, your title "of the People" is really false advertising, you may want to consider a revision.


I think it's a lot closer to the truth than you are capable of realizing


"Of the people" means everyone, not a select few.



I know, our society teaches you to believe that you are part of a majority, but I feel you are not, based upon your continuous "the sky is falling!" positions. As such, the name I use here in War Forum may require some further explanation:

Moderate Voice of the People means that I am touting my concepts as the Moderate expression of our people. I'm not representing the Conservative voice, nor the Liberal voice, et al. Let's think back to English class, and how modifiers (in this case adjectives) are employed. Break it down:

The People have a voice. In fact, they have many voices, as they are many people, with diverse (unfortunately, not diverse enough!) opinions. The Voice I am attempting to represent is the Moderate one. As such, the name works, and works well within the framework of our language.

Sorry to inform you, but defending this act of near-piracy is anything but moderate nor represent "the people."

Quote:

He's thus demonstrated some characteristics I've now chosen to flame him up for. Since no actual exchange of information is occurring, it's time to have some fun!



Quote:

I'll be the first to admit I'm playfully slapping him around, much like a cat does with a mouse. The fundamental difference is this...I won't kill him when I tire of it

(Pats you like a coach to a retard from the special olympics) Rrright.

Carry on.


THE POLITICALLY INCORRECT ONE.

Re: Gotta love pharmaceutical giant Pfizer
Tuesday, November 24, 2009 1:04 PM on j-body.org
To you: I may love to edit...but on the other hand, you love quotey boxes. So, we have me editing for clarity, and you quoting out of context for obfuscation and muck-slinging. We both know which is a more effective communication method, even if only one of us is willing to admit it

As you've completely ignored any of my efforts to introduce you to how pragmatism is a valid position, and instead choose to obstinately cling to your notion that I am a greedy, homeowner-hating sumbitch-lover of eminent domain when abused...I''m out of things to say. I really am. I don't wish to repeat myself any longer...it's not working.

To all: Yes, I know it seems impossible, that I've run out of things to say! But we all have a point where we've stated our case and really have nothing more to add. I'm at that point with our friend here. He may claim victory, and if the victory he wants to claim is that he wore me out by being inflexible (for there is no other accomplishment to claim here), then I gladly will take second place in that contest.

Should any of you wish to discuss Eminent Domain with me, feel free to jump in. All I ask is that you read, and reflect upon, my posts so far, so as to have a good working position for us to digress from. I promise not to piss in your teapot...that is, unless you put a tempest in it





Re: Gotta love pharmaceutical giant Pfizer
Tuesday, November 24, 2009 5:40 PM on j-body.org
ThatGuy85 wrote:

The EDIT button is your friend.
Too bad there isn't a button for comprehension, intelligence, and rational thought. But then again, if we had those, the War Forum would not be nearly as amusing.

Moderate Voice of the People wrote:

ThatGuy85 wrote:

Bill, you're just resorting to personal attacks now. Which is kinda funny, because that's usually Goodwrench's thing.
Well, you may feel that way...but I feel we've come to this juncture because of a resistance on Goodwench's part to absorb anything I've said.
If ever there was a perfect example of the pot calling the kettle black, this thread is it..

You two are a match made in Hell.








Re: Gotta love pharmaceutical giant Pfizer
Tuesday, November 24, 2009 6:09 PM on j-body.org
The pie-in-the-sky idea, that eminent domain is seldomly used, and most often for the betterment of all is horse----. That may have been the intent (highways, hydroelectric dams, etc). But in reality it is increasingly being utilized as a mere money grab. Force people off their personal property, demolish their homes, and build some lucrative tax-rich condos. This is the wrong of the matter. Nobody is building interstate highways through farmer brown's ranch anymore. It's everday folk being kicked around by greedy local and state governments who need to get their hands on the new source of tax revenue.

Ooooh, build a new stadium and look at all the new tax dollars it'll generate. Oooooh.

In our hearts we know this is wrong.

So if anyone can tell me why entire neighborhoods should be razed....houses that are old, but well kept. Tidy little communities forced to disband, sometimes after generations of families have lived ther....for the sake of a new casino or shopping mall? To he-- with that. Go find some empty field and build there.


“Poor Al Gore. Global warming completely debunked via the very Internet you invented. Oh, oh, the irony!” -Jon Stewart
Re: Gotta love pharmaceutical giant Pfizer
Tuesday, November 24, 2009 7:21 PM on j-body.org
Peddler: lol. I put myself way above Goodwench in this department. I've absorbed everything he's said, and countered it all. He's ignored everything I've said, and merely repeated what I've already absorbed and countered. Again, his approach does not constitute debate.

Scotta: You should present facts to back up your concept that eminent domain is being "abused" more and more. If you can do so, and they would have to be actual facts, not just news clips that show the side you wish to show, then I may be moved to agree. Also, still just yammering on about how "unfair" it is proves nothing...no one's denying it's unfair in some instances, and having you mimic Goodwench after he's beaten that drum for days is just...well, boring.

I've been telling you all along why any place taken under eminent domain should be razed. You don't seem to get it any more than Goodwench, so let's say it LOUDER, lol :

BECAUSE THERE IS GREATER GAIN THAN LOSS TO THE COMMUNITY!

Did you "hear" it this time?






Re: Gotta love pharmaceutical giant Pfizer
Tuesday, November 24, 2009 8:37 PM on j-body.org
You sir, should just listen to yourself. "for the greater good". No matter how much tax revenue is coming in... Triple the revenue overnight, and the local govts wll still try to get more. The end justifies the means, may me a philosophy, (pragmatism) <--- but it doesn't make it right.

To hard to use the iPhone to provide with you with the facts you pretend to be interested in. Will have to use the laptop tomorrow. But what then? Poo poo my source notwithstanding the fact?




“Poor Al Gore. Global warming completely debunked via the very Internet you invented. Oh, oh, the irony!” -Jon Stewart
Re: Gotta love pharmaceutical giant Pfizer
Wednesday, November 25, 2009 5:30 AM on j-body.org
Bill you've just transformed this into a debate on whether or not Eminent Domain works or does not work.

Now, if you remember the original post in this thread, AKA the original f*cking topic, tell us how that was such a greater gain for the community?

An entire block of homes turned into a field with a bunch of weeds, and families forced to move elsewhere = the greater good?

If you ask me, there should be some form of contract written that says if a private sector business forces people out of homes, they then HAVE to deliver on what was promised to the community, rather then starting the project and then saying "Meh... I don't wanna now".



Re: Gotta love pharmaceutical giant Pfizer
Wednesday, November 25, 2009 11:28 AM on j-body.org
ThatGuy85 wrote:

Bill you've just transformed this into a debate on whether or not Eminent Domain works or does not work.

Now, if you remember the original post in this thread, AKA the original f*cking topic, tell us how that was such a greater gain for the community?

An entire block of homes turned into a field with a bunch of weeds, and families forced to move elsewhere = the greater good?

If you ask me, there should be some form of contract written that says if a private sector business forces people out of homes, they then HAVE to deliver on what was promised to the community, rather then starting the project and then saying "Meh... I don't wanna now".



every other person in this post arguing this is also arguing over wether it works or not, not just bill.....


http://www.flickr.com/photos/sndsgood/ https://www.facebook.com/#!/Square1Photography
Re: Gotta love pharmaceutical giant Pfizer
Wednesday, December 02, 2009 5:40 AM on j-body.org
Moderate Voice of the People wrote:

Peddler: lol. I put myself way above Goodwench in this department.
LOL. I wager that he sees himself in the same light as you see yourself.

Having debated with both of you many times, I can tell you that you both tend to miss the points of your opposition, and counter what you expect to read, rather than what you actually read.







Re: Gotta love pharmaceutical giant Pfizer
Wednesday, December 02, 2009 8:40 PM on j-body.org
ThatGuy85 wrote:

Bill you've just transformed this into a debate on whether or not Eminent Domain works or does not work.

Now, if you remember the original post in this thread, AKA the original f*cking topic, tell us how that was such a greater gain for the community?

An entire block of homes turned into a field with a bunch of weeds, and families forced to move elsewhere = the greater good?

If you ask me, there should be some form of contract written that says if a private sector business forces people out of homes, they then HAVE to deliver on what was promised to the community, rather then starting the project and then saying "Meh... I don't wanna now".


Remember, in explaining ED's common, long-standing usage, I am not so much defending the practice as instead presenting the likely circumstances and outcomes based on historical information. Be careful there...you seem a bit emotional in your reply, and I am sure you can separate promoting the practice of eminent domain from the act of understanding it and correctly placing its eventual usage on one's own priority scale of "egregious offenses". For me, it's just not that high up. That doesn't mean I like it. It mostly means I understand it, and figure there's better things for me to get amped up about.

Surely, in this Pfizer case, the greater gain typically promised with ED ended up not being delivered. I can't, and don't defend what happened, although I can understand it. I can also point out that it is an anomalous occurrence...typically, the sacrifices made do pan out, and stories like this are thus thankfully rare.

With all due respect to your business acumen, I have to doubt that Pfizer's ultimate decision to bail was as simple as "Meh... I don't wanna now". The economy tanked. Pfizer also lost a lot here, and I'm sure backing away was not done out of apathy or contempt, but out of business decision-making, competently reached by trained professionals much more qualified that you or I.

As to folks like you touting the plight of those who were asked to leave via ED...I am also sure the families of Pfizer employees and shareholders could paint their own pictures of why forcing Pfizer to proceed would hurt them too. Or is that what angry people want here, an eye for an eye, force Pfizer to finish and make Pfizer's employees and stockholders pay next? LOL, I hope not!

So, overall...this one is a certainly a case of eminent domain's seamier side when things don't go as planned. While it is worthy of further study (as shown by its narrow margin in the Supreme Court, who found 5-4 for Pfizer), it is not all that exceptional in a world that's used eminent domain effectively for centuries. Fortunately, this one is a very unusual occurrence, as evidenced by the fact that it took an economy on the skids to ultimately bring this project to its knees.

As far as forcing compliance via some contractual obligation, I daresay it's a slippery slope. In a partner relationship such as this project, each party is expected to assume an equal amount of risk; asking the private developer to assume all of the risk just won't fly. Communities compete hard to land developments as sweet as this one...if one plays hardball this way, the developers will just go to other places to find more receptive town leaders.

============================

Please remember, folks...it's not that the effects of eminent domain don't suck sometimes. They usually do, if only for some. But in most every case, a tangible benefit in excess of that inconvenience is realized for the community. That's the whole idea of it. That's why getting all bent out of shape the few times ED goes awry is...a waste of time, and starting threads about things that are not exceptional while pointing at them as exceptional is...lame.

Starting such threads is almost as much of a waste of time as me trying to help hotheads see a more Pragmatic view





Edited 1 time(s). Last edited Wednesday, December 02, 2009 10:46 PM



Re: Gotta love pharmaceutical giant Pfizer
Thursday, December 03, 2009 1:08 PM on j-body.org
ThatGuy85 wrote:

Bill you've just transformed this into a debate on whether or not Eminent Domain works or does not work.

Now, if you remember the original post in this thread, AKA the original f*cking topic, tell us how that was such a greater gain for the community?

An entire block of homes turned into a field with a bunch of weeds, and families forced to move elsewhere = the greater good?

If you ask me, there should be some form of contract written that says if a private sector business forces people out of homes, they then HAVE to deliver on what was promised to the community, rather then starting the project and then saying "Meh... I don't wanna now".





part of what is being missed is that they ended up not building because of the downturn in the econemy. that happened in just about every business out there. buildings that wre in mid build got shut down do to the eceonemy. if you built in some type of contract that would have forced them to build you likely would have just forced the entire company to go under instead of companies pulling back until the econemy bounces back. its not about them saying, no we just dont wanna. its hey if we go ahead and build with the econemy in the tanks it will likely kill the company which would put hundreds or thousands more out of a job. there are hundreds of sites all over this country that have put a hold on construction until the ecomemy rises up again.


http://www.flickr.com/photos/sndsgood/ https://www.facebook.com/#!/Square1Photography
Forum Post / Reply
You must log in before you can post or reply to messages.

 

Start New Topic Advanced Search