caroljane

Adam, I am equally willing to be mistaken if my impression is wrong. And I have no problem with inherited money, believe me. This is one of the items that stuck in my mind from the Dinosaur Print Media but I cannot remember which one and I don't know how to look for it. i remember the article quoted exact figures, so I presumed it was from public records. It was not a lot of money, around a million or so as best I remember for the trust/investment fund. As far as I am concerned it just shows that Ryan prudently banked or invested his capital and lived off his income.

He also had tax-deferred college savings plan money and investment plans derived from trusts set up from inheritances from grandparents and an aunt (as did other Ryan family members).

Oops, I thought you were talking about Navotsgin. Same thing anyway. Linz

"Romanticism: The Case Against Nabokov" by L. Perigo

and so on. I con't deny that bootstraps were involved if that is what you are driving at. Yet you're saying that the construction company is the "foundation" of Paul Ryan's wealth. What do you mean? J Just that his money was inherited,, and presumably helped him through university and to start his political career. i don't deny that bootstraps were involved if that is what you are driving at.

I read various articles that mentioned his grandfather had a construction company which gained lucrative government contracts ...seemed fine to me, and I know Ryan has never been involved in the business.

I have actually found one sort of witness, on Algeneimer. "Engineer" said, "I live 2 miles from the presidential palace and pass it regularly. It didn't happen." Of course I cannot locate or interrogate Engineer but at least somebody in Cairo has said something.

Carol, Who woulda thought it? You do have the true-believer bug lurking down inside... Cast away, woman. I will not bother your stones further. Michael I would never cast any first stones. And I certainly do, like everyone, want to believe what is true. Thanks for allowing us all here to thrash out what truth we can find, nonviolently.

Carol, I have a long one coming for William, but just to answer the stone you cast, according to Sheldrake, set free from <em>dogma</em>. I believe he discusses 10 main current dogmas in science in the new book. (Just look at me. I promised myself I would not get sucked into defending The Scapegoated Outcast, but here I am. One day I'll learn...)</p><p> </p><p>btw - Your characterization is inaccurate. His work is published under the title of <em>The Science Delusion</em> in the overseas edition and he denies any intentional riff off the Dawkins book. He changed the title for the American market.</p><p> </p><p>Sheldrake actually spends most of his professional time engaged in repeatable experiments. This is all documented and all you need to do is read a little. He, also, constantly submits his results to peer review publications. Not every place accepts publishing him, though. It's not because of his method so much as because of the hypotheses and theories he tests. (His critics try to bash his method, but you see people using the same tools over and over in the publications they support.) Sheldrake tells the story of one editor who frankly informed him that he would never publish a paper on telepathy irrespective of who did it. And he was willing to take the risk of later in history being considered in the class of flat-earther. (Sheldrake's comment was at least this one was honest.)</p><p> </p><p><a href="http://www.sheldrake.org/Articles&Papers/papers/"><strong>Here</strong></a> are a few of Sheldrake's published results. You will not find much of this in publications accepted by Web of Science, but the periodicals are still peer-reviewed and many illustrious and serious people do present their work in them. Thank you for the list of his publications post 1981. I note that they are mostly periodicals about Jungian Thought, Parapsychology and alternative medicine/ Few are in his area of expertise, cell biology.

Well, I do not. If Ryan indicates he doesn't either, does it make him hypocritical? Whichever way, he is right. (Going on your comments. I don't know much about him.) No, not at all. My impression was, he is repudiating the foundations of his own wealth, in order to bring in new, better foundations for others according to his philosophy ; that is not hypocritical .

I approve thoroughly of state-aided wealth. My comment was that Ryan, who inherited it, apparently does not.

It is interesting that the Francsico speech was to those who "used state connections to make money". They Ryan family business was founded on government contracts. There's something Jungian in all this.

Dear Diary, Met Cousin Richard and Birgitta in the garden. They were doing the same thing as me, ha, ha. Princess Michael came to call on them so they were pretending not to be home. We had quite a chuckle and a good chat. They gave me some perspective on the jobs thing. Cousin R had a job as an architect but he had to give it up and be a duke when his brother got killed. Cousin B had a job too. She thought she was marrying an architect not a duke. They said that their jobs were much more fun than being royal. But the job market is uncertain, whilst being royal is a secure income unless there is a revolution. Cousin R has always been considered the brainbox in the family, so I am always interested in his views. Ich dien, William

Dear Diary, As I write Papa and Uncle Andy are having a row right outside my door, thankfully it is locked, they do not know I am in here. Awfully embarrassing, I do not want to be an eavesdropper but I cannot help hearing. Uncle Andy is upset about the jobs thing. "Telling ROYAL PRINCESSES to join the bloody army...you are not king yet you know...starving us out...when Papa hears about this..." and my Papa, 'Mummy's blue-eyed boy...India...Air Miles Andy..." This is awful. I am going to slip out the back way to the garden. In haste, william

Sheldrake considered naming his latest book "The Science Delusion' contra Dawkins. (He decided on "Science Set Free"). Set free from what? Repeatable experiments and peer review? It looks to me like he doffed his science robes in 1981 and has been a happy nudist ever since.

When is it scheduled now, for Donald Trump to tell Obama that he is fired?

I don't know any current philosophers/ But if my principle is, if your philosophy derives in part from your peronal sexuality, then you better be able to support your whole philosophy six ways to Sunday, then yes.

Of course not, and nor should readers in the 20th century, but Rand happened to be under public scrutiny then, not in the Golden Age of Greece.

Alas.much as I hate to halt anything in mid-romp, rationality does in fact rear its ugly head. Rand's inability to separate her individual sexuality from her philosophy was an excuse for serious philosophers not to take her seriously , and as well as a reason her novels continue to sell so well.

Hah! You presume we do not earn our visibililty on merit -- (X, Come out of the bathroom, your hair looks fine! No I really mean it it looks great -)and in a rational world, men of superior merit would naturally supersede women of inferior merit, as would women of superior merit, even if they preferred to be thought of as men like Ayn Rand did, supersede oh well anybody of inferior merit oh I don't know XRAY!! COME OUT OF THE BATHROOM!

The interesting Mayor of Toronto recently met with Sheldon Adelson, yes that Sheldon, whose wife is currently being honoured for her virtues in Tampa. The meeting was in furtherance of the mayor's announcement that Toronto is now open for business. This was a surprise to many Toronto businessmen who had not been notified that it was ever closed, and just carried on business. The mayor's bold initiatives to import Mr Adelson's kind of business will of course meet opposition from obstructionists and people who hate progress and free enterprise, who insist on living in Toronto although they have not demonstrated recently that they deserve to. I can see the liberal spin already. Some people just do not get the point.

XRay quick, where are you? We got him on the run now, he's spooked - it's your chance to go in and make any argument you want, and he'll just roll over and whimper! Still can't trust him though...I heered tell that Mama Gaede didn't raise no misogynists.

It doesn't help the women much.

Impressive, but why is he wearing a fascinator?

No Woman no Sleep? Scary part is you answered that undecipherable post by Brant... No Woman no Sleep? Scary part is you answered that undecipherable post by Brant... i'm used to deciphering sentences with no verbs at all, so one that only contains an auxiliary verb is easy.