You know, I still haven't gotten a response to my purchasing a firearm question. Apparently, burning the flag just to burn it is OK because it's an expression of respect for the rights protected by the Constitution.
So how about it? Will I get the same go-ahead nod if I decide to cowboy up, for no real reason, just because I can?
Somehow, I doubt it.
Edit:
quote:Does the flag have an intrinsic value to you? If so, why?
It's difficult to take you seriously when you say you can't figure it out, for two reasons. One, that question has been answered already-though perhaps not by him. Two, it's really not very difficult at all to imagine why someone would think the flag has intrinsic value.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Good post, CT. Actually, several of them. I think the commercial use is possibly more dangerous to the symbol than burning it in protest. At least a more insidious danger.
The first time I went to Washington to protest, I deliberately excercised my first amendment rights. I read a news paper, I prayed, I assembled, I spoke freely, and (not in a legal sense) petitioned the government.
I think it is important to excercise our rights, to make sure they stay in shape for when we need them.
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by The Pixiest: I've heard Teller talk.
It's a lie! A vicious lie! *plugs ears with fingers and hums*
There are actually a couple videos online that have Teller speaking. But out of respect for you, Rivka, I won't post the links. Posts: 3852 | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Rakeesh: So how about it? Will I get the same go-ahead nod if I decide to cowboy up, for no real reason, just because I can?
Somehow, I doubt it.
From me, you have the go ahead. You also have it from the government.
Provided, of course, you are responsible with it and don't start killing people.
And as far as you thinking that flag burning just because is stupid, that's fine. You have the right not to do it, and to protest against it.
Posts: 3852 | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Two, it's really not very difficult at all to imagine why someone would think the flag has intrinsic value.
Except that it is. The flag has symbolic value that exceeds the intrinsic value of the medium on which it is printed or sewn. An eagle has, assuming you value eagles, the intrinsic value of an eagle, and potential symbolic value as a national symbol or tribal emblem or whatever.
Someone might sentimentally value all flags in the way that someone else might sentimentally value all wildlife -- but what one person considers sentimentally important is hardly relevant to this conversation.
But here's the thing: the symbolic value of the flag lies in its symbolism of the country itself, and (to most Americans) the concept of liberty. Banning flag-burning is a direct and obvious irony, and consequently many people (myself included) see burning a flag in response to the loss of liberty represented by a ban on flag-burning to be not only perfectly appropriate but practically mandatory.
That said, flag-burning in the absence of a ban on flag-burning is pretty tacky, and should be done only when attempting to call into question the symbols the flag is meant to represent. My use of "should" here does not imply that I would legislate against other uses. *grin*
I actually suspect that many people who oppose flag-burning do so because the flag, while representing "America" to them, do not believe that "America" represents "liberty" -- and thus don't feel the disconnect. Perhaps "America" represents martial triumph, or general nationalism, or even a nebulous concept of "freedom" divorced from specifics.
quote:You know, I still haven't gotten a response to my purchasing a firearm question.
I didn't reply because the answer is fairly obvious: you should only rush out and buy firearms to demonstrate the value of the Second Amendment if you think that this is worth it to you. If it is, knock yourself out.
quote:Originally posted by Rakeesh: You know, I still haven't gotten a response to my purchasing a firearm question. Apparently, burning the flag just to burn it is OK because it's an expression of respect for the rights protected by the Constitution.
So how about it? Will I get the same go-ahead nod if I decide to cowboy up, for no real reason, just because I can?
No [that is, not the "same" sort of "nod" from me, although if you do it legally, I won't object], and I think the reason is directly derived from what I said previously about symbol, referent, and veneration. Of note -- though not specified previously, merely assumed -- the content of the referent is directly relevant to the action against the symbol in the flag burning case.
Posts: 14017 | Registered: May 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Another side note: I'm not using the term "desecration" because I take it that the flag is not sacred, so thus cannot be desecrated in the technical sense. I imagine we may each be approaching this with mildly different definitions, so I thought I'd make my use clear.
quote:I actually suspect that many people who oppose flag-burning do so because the flag, while representing "America" to them, do not believe that "America" represents "liberty" -- and thus don't feel the disconnect.
I suspect you are wrong.
Posts: 16551 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote: Except that it is. The flag has symbolic value. An eagle has, assuming you value eagles, intrinsic value.
I am not sure why we should value eagles intrinsically either. If rats disappeared off the face of the earth would you feel hurt? I have already stated that down the road its very likely we will cull eagles so clearly eagles can under certain circumstances be killed.
People have a need to encapsulate their value systems into a recognizable symbol, be it a wedding ring, the clothes you wear, the way you do up your hair. The manner in which one chooses to speak, the language they speak, the very words we choose to speak express or symbolize our thoughts and beliefs.
Americans created a country, an expression of their needs and values, it is therefore appropriate that a word or phrase that symbolizes that creation be invented. We call it the United States of America (often shortened) and we devised a seal and flag so that we and others recognize that concept.
So yes flag's have symbolic value, but they have intrinsic value as human beings need to have something fill the role that the flag fills.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
(I'm confused on how we agree now, BlackBlade, but I'm not going to pursue it. I'm pretty sure I can't follow it this morning. )
For what it's worth, I don't now, nor have I ever, felt any desire to burn a flag, except for the ones I see tattered from flapping in the wind off a car antenna or above the Madison Hummer dealership. However, that was a desire for a decent burial, not for protest.
Still, I don't find the perspective of those that do beyond the pale.
Posts: 14017 | Registered: May 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Tom: I wouldn't burn an American flag because that would be symbolically burning the country I love. Because despite our many flaws there's no better country in the world and no where I'd rather live.
Burning a flag doesn't fix any flaws, it just makes one an asshole.
There are many people who want to suck the liberty out of America. People who want to make a law to prohibit flag burning are pretty minor on the grand scheme of Statism. I'd take a law prohibiting flag burning in exchange for a law granting equal marriage rights... or a law that repeals the income tax and replaces it with the "fair tax". Or a law that rolled back a few social programs. Or a law that got rid of social security.
There are more important liberties than the right to burn a flag.
Posts: 7085 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:I wouldn't burn an American flag because that would be symbolically burning the country I love.
Which is why I say that people who oppose flag-burning in principle probably don't see "America" as being symbolic of liberty, but as something of value in itself. Therefore, the flag, as a symbol of "America," is divorced from the concept of "liberty" and instead merely represents the physical country.
quote:There are more important liberties we have lost than the right to burn a flag.
And...? Since we haven't lost this one yet, why not fight to keep it?
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
So yes flag's have symbolic value, but they have intrinsic value as human beings need to have something fill the role that the flag fills.
I suspect we have a conflict of definitions here. Would you elaborate on how you are using the word "intrinsic"? Because, to me, saying that something needs to fill the role that the flag fulfills is still discussing the flag's symbolic value.
Posts: 9866 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by TomDavidson: If rats disappeared off the face of the earth would you feel hurt?Um. Yes. Why?
That being the case I am wrong. Do you feel the existance of ever species is important?
quote:So yes flag's have symbolic value, but they have intrinsic value as human beings need to have something fill the role that the flag fills.Why? That's like saying that human beings need God.
I believe they do. Or at least I believe human beings are hard wired to believe in some sort of governing entity.
Are you disagreeing that human beings need to have symbols that represent their values or their thoughts?
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Burning a flag doesn't fix any flaws, it just makes one an asshole.
Pretty much what I think as well.
Let me point out that while I am strongly opposed to burning the flag, I do not support making it illegal.
Posts: 16551 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
So yes flag's have symbolic value, but they have intrinsic value as human beings need to have something fill the role that the flag fills.
I suspect we have a conflict of definitions here. Would you elaborate on how you are using the word "intrinsic"? Because, to me, saying that something needs to fill the role that the flag fulfills is still discussing the flag's symbolic value.
I am saying that people have an intrinsic need for symbols, therefore flags are a product of that intrinsic need. Yes flags have symbolic value, but they only exist because people need to produce a symbol to represent the country they belong to/create.
If not a flag, then something else would be created. Heck we already have a symbold devised to represent that country being in distress or in the wrong its called hanging the flag upside down.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:And those humans who do not seem to require this belief...?
Ill try to tread lightly I don't wish to take this discussion far from flag burning.
People who in actuality do not have ANY need for a belief in organization or governing force are the exception not the rule. I see it much the same way as the human need for sexual expression. I think just about everyone has it, but there are occasional people who handle the celebate lifestyle just fine.
I think history has demonstrated that cultures all create an explanation for the universe that usually includes a description of God, and that independant of each other.
People in same token are not content with merely thinking about things they hold true, they prefer to have physical manifestations of those things.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
mph: I am not sure what the difference is. I am positive that there are people who depict the flag upside down as a form of protest. Fred Phelps does it on his website.
Tom: I believe intent is important. If to a person setting something on fire is akin to expressing distress, then setting fire to a flag may be appropriate for them, but its important that others who see the expression understand that background. Burning flags however is almost universally considered an act of violence or desecration. Burning in effige has much the same meaning. Our enemies often burn our flag to symbolize their desire that our country suffer catastrophe or ruin.
If somebody employs such a long used expression such as burning, its very important that they realize that it has deep seeded meaning and they are either using it in its traditional fashion, or else it is neccesary they do alot to clarify why they are using it in an unorthodox fashion.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:mph: I am not sure what the difference is. I am positive that there are people who depict the flag upside down as a form of protest. Fred Phelps does it on his website.
It being a symbol of distress is consistent with Phelp's message. Doesn't he say that America is on the road to destruction?
Posts: 16551 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm disagreeing that flying the flag upside down is generally a symbol of the "country being in distress or in the wrong". It's a symbol of distress requesting help.
Phelps uses it in a metaphorical sense, but that doesn't change the meaning of it anymore than somebody using the word "mayday" in an advertisement changes its meaning.
Posts: 16551 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by mr_porteiro_head: I'm disagreeing that flying the flag upside down is generally a symbol of the "country being in distress or in the wrong". It's a symbol of distress requesting help.
Phelps uses it in a metaphorical sense, but that doesn't change the meaning of it anymore than somebody using the word "mayday" in an advertisement changes its meaning.
If you saw a group of anti war protestors all waving American flags that are upside down, would you believe they were requesting assistance or symbolizing that the country is in dire straights?
I understand that OFFICIALLY the flag is flown upside down as a request for assistance. But it is not an unreasonable stretch to fly it upside down as a form of protest. You wouldn't fly it upside down as a show of contempt.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm actually curious, Porter: what would you normally not be inclined to do that you would feel compelled to do as a protest if it were made illegal? Anything?
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm not saying it couldn't happen, but I can't think of anything right now.
I can think of situations where I'd break the law, but mostly in situations where I'd expect to not get caught and suffer legal consequence, which means that I wouldn't be doing it as a protest.
Posts: 16551 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
So yes flag's have symbolic value, but they have intrinsic value as human beings need to have something fill the role that the flag fills.
I suspect we have a conflict of definitions here. Would you elaborate on how you are using the word "intrinsic"? Because, to me, saying that something needs to fill the role that the flag fulfills is still discussing the flag's symbolic value.
I am saying that people have an intrinsic need for symbols, therefore flags are a product of that intrinsic need. Yes flags have symbolic value, but they only exist because people need to produce a symbol to represent the country they belong to/create.
If not a flag, then something else would be created. Heck we already have a symbold devised to represent that country being in distress or in the wrong its called hanging the flag upside down.
Then I think you are missing the point of the earlier distinction between intrinsic and symbolic value. Intrinsic value, in that case, meaning value that the object itself has apart from its symbolic value.
Posts: 9866 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:I think the most usual reason for me to break the law (at least knowingly) is in protest.
When you break the law in protest, do you hide your protest or do you do it openly? Do you accept the legal punishment for your crimes, or do you try to avoid it?
Posts: 16551 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
So yes flag's have symbolic value, but they have intrinsic value as human beings need to have something fill the role that the flag fills.
I suspect we have a conflict of definitions here. Would you elaborate on how you are using the word "intrinsic"? Because, to me, saying that something needs to fill the role that the flag fulfills is still discussing the flag's symbolic value.
I am saying that people have an intrinsic need for symbols, therefore flags are a product of that intrinsic need. Yes flags have symbolic value, but they only exist because people need to produce a symbol to represent the country they belong to/create.
If not a flag, then something else would be created. Heck we already have a symbold devised to represent that country being in distress or in the wrong its called hanging the flag upside down.
Then I think you are missing the point of the earlier distinction between intrinsic and symbolic value. Intrinsic value, in that case, meaning value that the object itself has apart from its symbolic value.
People were making the point that flags being burned and eagles being shot are not the same as flags do not have any value in of themselves and eagles do. I made mention that the cloth could be used to make clothing, so flags do have at least THAT much value.
I am arguing that FLAGS do have intrinsic value as people feel a need to have symbols. A flag, a crest, a seal, a chop, they are all really the same thing. The symbol is an extension of the need. If there was no intrinsic need for symbols I do not think flags would exist.
The American part of the phrase "American Flag" may only have symbolic value but the FLAG part does have intrinsic value.
edit: I admit that right now I am alittle shaky in my writing, perhaps you could provide me with an example of something that has what you call, "intrinsic value."
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
A turkey has intrinsic value because it can be eaten as food, regardless of its value as a symbol.
If you ignore its value as a symbol, the flag only has as much value as a random scrap of cloth that size.
But I agree with what you are saying -- just because the flag's value is tied to its symbolic meaning doesn't mean that value isn't real or important.
Posts: 16551 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by mr_porteiro_head: A turkey has intrinsic value because it can be eaten as food, regardless of its value as a symbol.
If you ignore its value as a symbol, the flag only has as much value as a random scrap of cloth that size.
But I agree with what you are saying -- just because the flag's value is tied to its symbolic meaning doesn't mean that value isn't real or important.
I guess that last part is a concession I have not made.
I can agree then that the American Flag has no value beyond the cloth, ink, and time invested to create it. I guess then that I think symbolic value is being undervalued.
edit: I think what tripped me up is that people need to eat therefore a turkey is worth something, and in same token people need symbols and therefore a flag is worth something.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think that you [edit: BB] are confusing "intrinsic" with "necessary." The symbolic value of flags might be necessary. It might even, as you say, fill an intrinsic need in humans. But the fact that the need is intrinsic to humans does not make the symbolic value an intrinsic to the flag.
Posts: 9866 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by dkw: I think that you [edit: BB] are confusing "intrinsic" with "necessary." The symbolic value of flags might be necessary. It might even, as you say, fill an intrinsic need in humans. But the fact that the need is intrinsic to humans does not make the symbolic value an intrinsic to the flag.
Yes, I believe you are right.
edit: But then again, how does anything have intrinsic value then? What could possibly have universal intrinsic value not exclusive to human happiness?
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
The word intrinsic is being used here to mean "as opposed to symbolic". A turkey has intrinsic value as food or as a part of the ecosystem even when you divorce it from its value as a symbol.
Posts: 16551 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by mr_porteiro_head: The word intrinsic is being used here to mean "as opposed to symbolic". A turkey has intrinsic value as food or as a part of the ecosystem even when you divorce it from its value as a symbol.
OK then but why does an ecosystem even matter then? Why does surviving via eating matter? I'm just not seeing what intrinsic value is derived from. If we can't establish a core neccesity then why is anything valuable?
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:OK then but why does an ecosystem even matter then? Why does surviving via eating matter?
That doesn't matter, because the word intrinsic is being use to mean as opposed to symbolic. A turkey's value as food or as part of the ecosystem is not symbolic.
Posts: 16551 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
It might help to look at it this way -- would a person completely unfamiliar with the culture (say, an alien civilization (from space, not from another country)) recognize the value? If so it is likely an intrinsic value. If someone had never heard of the USA, then a rectangle sewed together out of three colors of cloth would not mean anything more to them than a pretty decoration, or a small blanket. "Pretty" might be an intrinsic value of the flag (although a subjective one) but "represents the ideals of the United States of America" is not.
It has nothing to do with how important the value is, merely whether or not it is a property of the thing itself or derived from the fact that it represents something else.
Posts: 9866 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Remember when the Bush Administration more or less equated questioning their leadership with a lack of patriotism?
Could you quote some examples of this? "More or less" leaves a lot of room for interpretation, so I'd like to know to exactly what you're referring before responding.
I'm going to decline, not because I can't find them, but because I think it has been covered enough in the media and for that matter on this website to the point where the behavior should be accepted as something that has happened, so I'm not going to go through the effort to put a list together. If you seriously question the inferences Administration officials have made (and may or may not have outright said so, but I can't recall a time off the top of my head), then I question how often you've watch or read national political news in the last two and a half years.
I will however do just a quick search and grab the first thing I see, which is this:
quote:On Saturday, November 18, 2006, Attorney General Alberto Gonzales picked up the cudgels in a talk to 400 cadets from the Air Force Academy’s political science and law classes. Critics of the warrantless surveillance program were taking a “shortsighted” view, Gonzales said:
“Its [the critics'] definition of freedom -- one utterly divorced from civic responsibility -- is superficial and is itself a grave threat to the liberty and security of the American people."
He's saying there, that your freedom to criticize government actions should be tempered by your civic duty to silence, which to me means you should shut your mouth and follow the party line, because dissent is at least temporarily unpatriotic. There are dozens of more quotes out there, if you want to see the really dramatic invective look at Dick Cheney. Bush generally declines to make such statements himself, it always comes from Tony Snow, Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, or some other Admin. official.
Pix -
quote:It seems odd to me, how many people who support flag burning go batcaca crazy if you burn another countries flag. I once posted a very poor drawing of someone burning a french flag here during a debate on flag burning. It drew a great deal of venom. And not just the well deserved thrashing of my "art." I was told I insulted an entire people. I was told I didn't deserve politeness because I had dared to *draw* someone burning a *french* flag.
Like I said earlier in the thread, I think what matters is your reasoning. Why did you depict a French flag? Was it to intentionally show disdain for France? If so, then I think you did in fact insult an entire people. If it was for no particular reason, then I have to wonder why you picked France and didn't just make a flag up, or why you didn't leave it blank? What matters most to me is intent. When someone burns the American flag because they want America to similarly burn in flames, then I'll denounce them, when they do it to protest a US action peaceably, then I'll let them do it. I think there is a difference, inherently, between burning your own flag and burning someone else's. Burning our flag can mean dozens of things, burning someone else's flag is almost always a sign of open contempt. I'm just curious as to what your reasons were.
And no matter what way you parse it, I can't fathom the comparison that flag burning is in any way shape or form like abortion, except that they are both polarizing issues, devoid of any specific similarities.
Rakeesh -
quote:You know, I still haven't gotten a response to my purchasing a firearm question. Apparently, burning the flag just to burn it is OK because it's an expression of respect for the rights protected by the Constitution.
So how about it? Will I get the same go-ahead nod if I decide to cowboy up, for no real reason, just because I can?
Well, if, like you said before, that refers to carrying a concealed weapon, I don't really think your statement will mean all that much since no one will see it
But seriously, you can if you want, but I don't know what you would get out of it personally. Millions upon millions of Americans have weapons, and I'd imagine near that many carry them on their person, but nowhere near that many, probably not even in the triple digits, burn a flag every year. So, doing something that millions of others do is just following the crowd, you aren't really making much of a distinctive statement. Going against the grain and doing something you rarely see is a statement.
So to answer, sure, go for it, I won't argue against it, but I guess it's all about what you get it out of it personally, as I don't think you'd be making much of a public statement by doing so.
Blackblade -
What is it with you and ornithicide man? I don't think killing ANY creature is the same thing as burning a flag, they aren't at all comparable. If you want to hit closer to the mark, change it to burning an eagle effigy and I think you're back on track.
Pix again -
quote:I wouldn't burn an American flag because that would be symbolically burning the country I love. Because despite our many flaws there's no better country in the world and no where I'd rather live.
Burning a flag doesn't fix any flaws, it just makes one an asshole.
There are many people who want to suck the liberty out of America. People who want to make a law to prohibit flag burning are pretty minor on the grand scheme of Statism. I'd take a law prohibiting flag burning in exchange for a law granting equal marriage rights... or a law that repeals the income tax and replaces it with the "fair tax". Or a law that rolled back a few social programs. Or a law that got rid of social security.
There are more important liberties than the right to burn a flag.
I don't think you should be so liberal in your trading of freedoms. We aren't playing let's make a deal with our liberties, and there's no reason it should be an either/or situation. I don't equate the flag with America like you do, they aren't the same thing, and burning it doesn't mean one thing, it can mean many things. And I have to say again, I find it very, very distressing that you would trade away a liberty, even one you find to be fairly minor for anything else. The oft quoted Ben Franklin comes to mind: 'Those who would trade away a little liberty to gain temporary security deserve neither liberty nor security.' But hey, what do the founding fathers know?
And I agree with this:
quote:The first time I burn an American flag will be the day after they take away my right to.
I can imagine other instances where I might burn a flag, but that's the most obvious to me. On another note, I think Bush has done many things that are unAmerican and wrong for this country, maybe even unpatriotic in the use of the word Republicans have, but I bet if he were the best president in the world but burned a flag on national TV he'd be villified more than he is now. I don't trust this country when it comes to things like valuing or judging patriotism and what is and isn't patriotic, because we'll let our leaders lie to us, and steal from us, and commit crimes with zero reprecussions, but flag burning is a sacrilige? Maybe we just don't have much self respect.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:I think the most usual reason for me to break the law (at least knowingly) is in protest.
When you break the law in protest, do you hide your protest or do you do it openly? Do you accept the legal punishment for your crimes, or do you try to avoid it?
Openly, as the point was to protest. (I did have a friend who refused to wear seatbelts once they became mandatory. That never made a whole lot of sense to me.) There were some legal consequences. I expected to be arrested and I was, though the charges were eventually dismissed.
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Intrinsic value is first-order value: it is derived from the thing itself. [That thing is therefore a "first-order good."]
Extrinsic value is value that is not inherent to the object in question, but rather derived from the access to some other thing. [In this case, the "second-order good" derives its value from the "first-order good."]
---
Your sweetie is of intrinsic value to you. The train you take to be with your sweetie is (with reference to the sweetie) of extrinsic value, in that its value is dependent on the value of your sweetie to you.
If you break up with your sweetie in Oklahoma, and if there is nothing else of specific value to you in Oklahoma, then your advance tickets to Oklahoma have dropped in value. Their value wasn't intrinsic to them, but dependent (or extrinsic) on the value of your sweetie.
---
Mind you, something can have both intrinsic and extrinsic value. Often it is the comparative unit value that is relevant -- e.g., there is some value to the cloth of the flag, but it isn't of comparable value to that of "liberty" or "the United States" in most cases.
[Or, for example, maybe you really like train rides, and you'd take the trip to Oklahoma and back anyway. But the comparable drop in value via loss of the primary first-order good is generally the point of such an example, not whether there is any slight value left at all.]
Also, those values are generally indexical (i.e., "for you, today" or "for Jerry Seinfeld, 3 years ago").
Posts: 14017 | Registered: May 2000
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
