piz

Another Symptom

21 posts in this topic

On my way home from a business thing tonight, I did an informal check of every billboard on my route, because I've had a thought nagging at my mind. What I found confirmed my hunch: of the 15 billboards I saw, 8 of them were government "ads." They promoted fatherhood, marriage, energy-saving lightbulbs, and other things government has no business being involved in. The closest they came to legitimate was an ad for a local anti-graffiti initiative, warning that, surprise of surprises, defacing other people's property is a crime.

I'd noticed a growing proliferation of these ".gov" messages, and was wondering just how much they were taking over. In this one case, more than half. Based on that, I've come up with a better use for my pitchfork than going after bankers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Government graffiti?

Nice. :rolleyes:

You're reduced to a one-word poem consisting of only a single word that rhymes with itself? You can do better than that!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Government graffiti?

Nice. :rolleyes:

You're reduced to a one-word poem consisting of only a single word that rhymes with itself? You can do better than that!

Nice twice! B)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Government graffiti?

Nice. B)

You're reduced to a one-word poem consisting of only a single word that rhymes with itself? You can do better than that!

Nice twice! :D

Which will suffice. :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One of the nicest things about living in in the Northern Virginia/Washington D.C. area is the lack of billboards. It usually takes visiting friends and family about a hour of driving around the area to notice there is something missing along our roadways here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
One of the nicest things about living in in the Northern Virginia/Washington D.C. area is the lack of billboards. It usually takes visiting friends and family about a hour of driving around the area to notice there is something missing along our roadways here.

Several states have banned billboards. They seized the rights of the property owners along the road through "regulations" without even compensation under eminent domain. You can have anything you want that you think is "nice" simply by stealing it. It happens all the time but there is no justification for it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Government graffiti?

Nice. :D

You're reduced to a one-word poem consisting of only a single word that rhymes with itself? You can do better than that!

Nice twice! B)

Which will suffice. :rolleyes:

Thrice twice nice might suffice.

:D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
One of the nicest things about living in in the Northern Virginia/Washington D.C. area is the lack of billboards. It usually takes visiting friends and family about a hour of driving around the area to notice there is something missing along our roadways here.

Several states have banned billboards. They seized the rights of the property owners along the road through "regulations" without even compensation under eminent domain. You can have anything you want that you think is "nice" simply by stealing it. It happens all the time but there is no justification for it.

Looks like I touched upon a sensitive subject. How about flipping the arguement around. Why should drivers be assaulted with ads for lawyers, live nude dancers, muffler repair, and casinos while driving their kids to school? Maybe we should blindfold the kids?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
One of the nicest things about living in in the Northern Virginia/Washington D.C. area is the lack of billboards. It usually takes visiting friends and family about a hour of driving around the area to notice there is something missing along our roadways here.

Several states have banned billboards. They seized the rights of the property owners along the road through "regulations" without even compensation under eminent domain. You can have anything you want that you think is "nice" simply by stealing it. It happens all the time but there is no justification for it.

Looks like I touched upon a sensitive subject. How about flipping the arguement around. Why should drivers be assaulted with ads for lawyers, live nude dancers, muffler repair, and casinos while driving their kids to school? Maybe we should blindfold the kids?

The attack of the billboards? And the signs on passing trucks, and malevolent bumper stickers, and telephone poles and smokestacks?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Looks like I touched upon a sensitive subject. How about flipping the arguement around. Why should drivers be assaulted with ads for lawyers, live nude dancers, muffler repair, and casinos while driving their kids to school? Maybe we should blindfold the kids?
The practical morality of electing politicians who promise to deliver voters from nightmares, instead of making it possible for them to achieve dreams, is not a "sensitive" subject that has epistemological or hypothetically debatable relevance to your desire for a delayed realization that there is "something missing" from your field of vision.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Looks like I touched upon a sensitive subject. How about flipping the arguement around. Why should drivers be assaulted with ads for lawyers, live nude dancers, muffler repair, and casinos while driving their kids to school? Maybe we should blindfold the kids?
The practical morality of electing politicians who promise to deliver voters from nightmares, instead of making it possible for them to achieve dreams, is not a "sensitive" subject that has epistemological or hypothetically debatable relevance to your desire for a delayed realization that there is "something missing" from your field of vision.

Maybe I need another coffee because that was complete gibberish. Or maybe I stepped into the middle of an inside joke.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Looks like I touched upon a sensitive subject. How about flipping the arguement around. Why should drivers be assaulted with ads for lawyers, live nude dancers, muffler repair, and casinos while driving their kids to school? Maybe we should blindfold the kids?
The practical morality of electing politicians who promise to deliver voters from nightmares, instead of making it possible for them to achieve dreams, is not a "sensitive" subject that has epistemological or hypothetically debatable relevance to your desire for a delayed realization that there is "something missing" from your field of vision.

Maybe I need another coffee because that was complete gibberish. Or maybe I stepped into the middle of an inside joke.

Maybe I needed to quote your post about billboards. I didn't think my single sentence put that much work on a reader, with or without caffeine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
One of the nicest things about living in in the Northern Virginia/Washington D.C. area is the lack of billboards. It usually takes visiting friends and family about a hour of driving around the area to notice there is something missing along our roadways here.

Several states have banned billboards. They seized the rights of the property owners along the road through "regulations" without even compensation under eminent domain. You can have anything you want that you think is "nice" simply by stealing it. It happens all the time but there is no justification for it.

Looks like I touched upon a sensitive subject. How about flipping the arguement around. Why should drivers be assaulted with ads for lawyers, live nude dancers, muffler repair, and casinos while driving their kids to school? Maybe we should blindfold the kids?

Ideally, the roads should be private and the land should be private, and it should be up to the owners whether or not billboards go up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Looks like I touched upon a sensitive subject. How about flipping the arguement around. Why should drivers be assaulted with ads for lawyers, live nude dancers, muffler repair, and casinos while driving their kids to school? Maybe we should blindfold the kids?
The practical morality of electing politicians who promise to deliver voters from nightmares, instead of making it possible for them to achieve dreams, is not a "sensitive" subject that has epistemological or hypothetically debatable relevance to your desire for a delayed realization that there is "something missing" from your field of vision.

Well put, Cometmaker. I agree.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
One of the nicest things about living in in the Northern Virginia/Washington D.C. area is the lack of billboards. It usually takes visiting friends and family about a hour of driving around the area to notice there is something missing along our roadways here.

Several states have banned billboards. They seized the rights of the property owners along the road through "regulations" without even compensation under eminent domain. You can have anything you want that you think is "nice" simply by stealing it. It happens all the time but there is no justification for it.

Looks like I touched upon a sensitive subject. How about flipping the arguement around. Why should drivers be assaulted with ads for lawyers, live nude dancers, muffler repair, and casinos while driving their kids to school? Maybe we should blindfold the kids?

James, maybe you will find this helpful:

"Only one aspect of sex is a legitimate field for legislation: the protection of minors and of unconsenting adults. Apart from criminal actions (such as rape), this aspect includes the need to protect people from being confronted with sights they regard as loathsome. (A corollary of the freedom to see and hear, is the freedom not to look or listen.) Legal restraints on certain types of public displays, such as posters or window displays, are proper—but this is an issue of procedure, of etiquette, not of morality . . .

The rights of those who seek pornography would not be infringed by rules protecting the rights of those who find pornography offensive—e.g., sexually explicit posters may properly be forbidden in public places; warning signs, such as “For Adults Only,” may properly be required of private places which are open to the public. This protects the unconsenting, and has nothing to do with censorship, i.e., with prohibiting thought or speech." [Ayn Rand, "Thought Control," The Ayn Rand Letter]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
One of the nicest things about living in in the Northern Virginia/Washington D.C. area is the lack of billboards. It usually takes visiting friends and family about a hour of driving around the area to notice there is something missing along our roadways here.

Several states have banned billboards. They seized the rights of the property owners along the road through "regulations" without even compensation under eminent domain. You can have anything you want that you think is "nice" simply by stealing it. It happens all the time but there is no justification for it.

Looks like I touched upon a sensitive subject. How about flipping the arguement around. Why should drivers be assaulted with ads for lawyers, live nude dancers, muffler repair, and casinos while driving their kids to school? Maybe we should blindfold the kids?

James, maybe you will find this helpful:

"Only one aspect of sex is a legitimate field for legislation: the protection of minors and of unconsenting adults. Apart from criminal actions (such as rape), this aspect includes the need to protect people from being confronted with sights they regard as loathsome. (A corollary of the freedom to see and hear, is the freedom not to look or listen.) Legal restraints on certain types of public displays, such as posters or window displays, are proper—but this is an issue of procedure, of etiquette, not of morality . . .

The rights of those who seek pornography would not be infringed by rules protecting the rights of those who find pornography offensive—e.g., sexually explicit posters may properly be forbidden in public places; warning signs, such as “For Adults Only,” may properly be required of private places which are open to the public. This protects the unconsenting, and has nothing to do with censorship, i.e., with prohibiting thought or speech." [Ayn Rand, "Thought Control," The Ayn Rand Letter]

Thanks for finding that Ray. I thought of it too, but such references are no longer at my fingertips, because my Objectivist Research CD-ROM won't work with my Mac. I wish that ARI would re-issue the CD-ROM, so that we could get an update, including Mac compatibility.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thanks for finding that Ray. I thought of it too, but such references are no longer at my fingertips, because my Objectivist Research CD-ROM won't work with my Mac. I wish that ARI would re-issue the CD-ROM, so that we could get an update, including Mac compatibility.

I don't think you meant it that way but to ensure clarity for those reading the thread in the future, ARI never published the CD-ROM, my company did. And in fact I offered it to them for free but they decided it was too much effort to be worth their while. :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, with VMWare Fusion or Parallels, you can run Windows (and the CD-ROM) on your Mac. I do this everyday on my own Mac Pro.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites