Wesley Clark Support Warp Drive, Time Travel

Another way to get FTL without violating causality is if there's some
way of increasing the speed of light over a finite volume of space.
If there's a limit to how quickly this can be done, and if the speed
of light falls off gradually back toward its usual speed as you leave
the region rather than there being any sharp edges, this would also
allow FTL without violating causality. In a sense, gravitational
waves do exactly this, albeit to too small and too temporary a degree
to be useful.

Shouldn't anti-gravity do this? Get a whole bunch of exotic matter and
concentrate in in a small area using a nongravitational force such as a
magnetic or gravitational field. The exotic matter should have a repulsive
gravitational field. Now if you have an ultra dense bar or rail of exotic
matter that is light years long, that is perhaps a hollow tube. You could then
shine a laser beam through the tube. The laser beam will be red shifted as it
climbs up the antigravity field. Time is compressed inside the field so light
moves faster.

Tom

On Sun, 05 Oct 2003 11:58:01 -0700, in a place far, far away, Hop
David made the phosphor on my monitor
glow in such a way as to indicate that:

You and Rand claim it's dishonest saying cut in tax rates != tax cut,
because cutting tax rates spurs productivity and results in a net tax
increase.

No, I'm not saying that a cut in tax rates cannot be said to be either
a tax cut or a tax increase, because there's no way to know for sure
what the effect will be.

Well my contention that Bush's tax rate cuts are a sham are borne out by
employment statistics. His tax rate cuts have _not_ made us more productive.

This is a remarkable double non-sequitur. No one was talking about
productivity wrt tax rates, but in fact, the reason that unemployment
is not falling is precisely *because* productivity has increased, and
employers can accomplish as much or more with fewer workers. Over the
longer haul, this is a good thing, but in the short run it equates to
economic pain for the workers who are laid off as a result.

--
simberg.interglobal.org * 310 372-7963 (CA) 307 739-1296 (Jackson Hole)
interglobal space lines * 307 733-1715 (Fax) http://www.interglobal.org

"Extraordinary launch vehicles require extraordinary markets..."
Swap the first . and @ and throw out the ".trash" to email me.
Here's my email address for autospammers:

On 7 Oct 2003 13:24:42 GMT, in a place far, far away, Geoffrey A.
Landis made the phosphor on my monitor
glow in such a way as to indicate that:

"Cutting" taxes without cutting spending is, in fact, DEFERRING taxes,
not cutting them. It's charging up the government debt. That is
EXACTLY like putting expenses on your credit card and thus charging up
personal debt.

Now, if you like, you may state that the illusion of cutting taxes may
stimulate the economy.

You, like many, continue to confuse cutting taxes with cutting tax
rates. It's quite possible to cut rates and increase taxes.

--
simberg.interglobal.org * 310 372-7963 (CA) 307 739-1296 (Jackson Hole)
interglobal space lines * 307 733-1715 (Fax) http://www.interglobal.org

"Extraordinary launch vehicles require extraordinary markets..."
Swap the first . and @ and throw out the ".trash" to email me.
Here's my email address for autospammers:

On Sat, 04 Oct 2003 16:20:25 -0700, in a place far, far away, Hop
David made the phosphor on my monitor
glow in such a way as to indicate that:

The budget surplus was a result of the Repubs stopping the Clinton
tax-and-spend spree.

okaaay. . .

The current budget defecits are a result of Repubs
acting like Dems, and having a weiner of a Repub President who's also
acting like a Dem...

Wait. Aren't these the same repubs who stopped the Clinton spending
spree? Why are they all of a sudden acting so differently? Seems like a
Jekyll and Hyde syndrome.

No, both parties are the Big Government party. But when Congress is
Republican with a Democrat in the White House they tend to be more
resistant to spending programs.

Face it. Fiscal responsibility isn't a Republican trait.

Apparently not. I'd prefer a Democrat president and a Republican
Congress if there weren't a war on.

--
simberg.interglobal.org * 310 372-7963 (CA) 307 739-1296 (Jackson Hole)
interglobal space lines * 307 733-1715 (Fax) http://www.interglobal.org

"Extraordinary launch vehicles require extraordinary markets..."
Swap the first . and @ and throw out the ".trash" to email me.
Here's my email address for autospammers:

On Tue, 07 Oct 2003 18:35:28 GMT, in a place far, far away,
h (Rand Simberg) made the phosphor on my
monitor glow in such a way as to indicate that:

On Sun, 05 Oct 2003 11:58:01 -0700, in a place far, far away, Hop
David made the phosphor on my monitor
glow in such a way as to indicate that:

You and Rand claim it's dishonest saying cut in tax rates != tax cut,
because cutting tax rates spurs productivity and results in a net tax
increase.

No, I'm not saying that a cut in tax rates cannot be said to be either
a tax cut or a tax increase, because there's no way to know for sure
what the effect will be.

Whoops. That should be "I *am* saying that a cut..."

--
simberg.interglobal.org * 310 372-7963 (CA) 307 739-1296 (Jackson Hole)
interglobal space lines * 307 733-1715 (Fax) http://www.interglobal.org

"Extraordinary launch vehicles require extraordinary markets..."
Swap the first . and @ and throw out the ".trash" to email me.
Here's my email address for autospammers:

On Sun, 05 Oct 2003 03:22:44 GMT, in a place far, far away, Joann
Evans made the phosphor on my monitor glow
in such a way as to indicate that:

Please, if you want good politicians,
that's what you will get.

I *always* want good politicians.

No, probably what you want is statesmen. What you get are
politicians...

--
simberg.interglobal.org * 310 372-7963 (CA) 307 739-1296 (Jackson Hole)
interglobal space lines * 307 733-1715 (Fax) http://www.interglobal.org

"Extraordinary launch vehicles require extraordinary markets..."
Swap the first . and @ and throw out the ".trash" to email me.
Here's my email address for autospammers:

Geoffrey A. Landis wrotet:
"Cutting" taxes without cutting spending is, in fact, DEFERRING taxes,
not cutting them. It's charging up the government debt. That is
EXACTLY like putting expenses on your credit card and thus charging up
personal debt.

Now, if you like, you may state that the illusion of cutting taxes may
stimulate the economy.

In Rand Simberg replied:
You, like many, continue to confuse cutting taxes with cutting tax
rates. It's quite possible to cut rates and increase taxes.


That seems like a good exit line to me.



--
Geoffrey A. Landis
http://www.sff.net/people/geoffrey.landis

"Rand Simberg" wrote in message
...
No, probably what you want is statesmen. What you get are
politicians...

To quote, I think, Bloom County:
"A statesman is a dead politician. Yes sir! What this country needs is
more statesmen."

"Geoffrey A. Landis" wrote in message
news:20031007092441942-

"Cutting" taxes without cutting spending is, in fact, DEFERRING
taxes, not cutting them. It's charging up the government debt. That
is EXACTLY like putting expenses on your credit card and thus
charging up personal debt.

I do not quite understand this, the size of the cake is not fixed.
IIRC, around fifteen to twenty years back when New Zealand was going
through a period of intense economic reform, a rather surprising study
was commissioned by the Inland Revenue Department to determine what the
optimal total tax rate was, (as a percentage of GNP). Not surprisingly
this yielded a result that was not only politically unacceptable but
also against the vested interests of the IRD itself.

The optimal rate was found to be around 21%, at this point total tax
revenue is maximized, the actual tax rate is of course nearly twice
this. Above 21% and the economy is effectively stifled, reducing the
overall tax take.

This assumes that government should be maximized, if this is not optimal
for the people then one would expect the ideal tax rate to be somewhat
lower than this.

Pete.

On Wed, 8 Oct 2003 11:09:00 +1300, in a place far, far away, "Pete
Lynn" made the phosphor on my monitor glow
in such a way as to indicate that:

"Geoffrey A. Landis" wrote in message
news:20031007092441942-

"Cutting" taxes without cutting spending is, in fact, DEFERRING
taxes, not cutting them. It's charging up the government debt. That
is EXACTLY like putting expenses on your credit card and thus
charging up personal debt.

I do not quite understand this, the size of the cake is not fixed.

Yes, that's my point. While the debt must eventually be paid, through
taxes, deferring them could have the effect of reducing the burden, by
making it a smaller percentage of the income of either individuals,
the nation, or both. And in fact, many a business has been started by
putting expenses on credit cards and charging up on personal debt. If
the business is successful, it can ultimately be a good investment.

--
simberg.interglobal.org * 310 372-7963 (CA) 307 739-1296 (Jackson Hole)
interglobal space lines * 307 733-1715 (Fax) http://www.interglobal.org

"Extraordinary launch vehicles require extraordinary markets..."
Swap the first . and @ and throw out the ".trash" to email me.
Here's my email address for autospammers: