Do stores start to be open on Sundays now?

[Hank W.]

because the deliveries do not run on weekends

it seems my local LIDL atleast got a delivery yesterday.

[sammy]

because the deliveries do not run on weekends

it seems my local LIDL atleast got a delivery yesterday.

I stand corrected, however I did say I was guessing (hence also the (?) in the original). It has seemed to me that on weekends it's sometimes difficult to find certain things that you usually find rather easily on weekdays. Aubergines for a start, or fresh basil. Things I've learnt to buy during the week just in case. But naturally I can't extend my experiences at the local Supermarkt to cover all other ones

[jamie_designer]

I dismiss this quite easily, because I personally believe that its not the governments job to keep businesses open. Some of you might have another point of view on that, so its arguable.

1. Just as an argumentative issue, precisely how would you say "I like X" and "I personally believe that X" differ from each other?

2. That is, isn't the above quotation just another example of "I like green" vs "I like blue"?

3.How about those who personally believe that the government does (and/or should) have its say in how business is made in country X? Are they wrong, if they do not personally believe as you do? If so, where's the Archimedes' point to prove they are?

4. I'm interested in hearing your answer, not because I'd be passionately fixated on Sunday opening hours, but since the issue is a philosophical one. How does "I feel X is right" essentially differ from "I like X" (when taken in the sense "I feel X is pleasurable")?

(and no, I don't necessarily have an answer to this question myself )

1. I wouldn't say they differ at all, both statements show a preference for X, as you have written them their they are logically the same statement.
2. Yes that is correct
3. lets assign your example a value of X. If a person then believes X they are neither right nor wrong. If a person says " I believe X" what they are saying is my personal preference is towards X.
4. Well they differ in the way that " I like X " is understandable and " I feel X is right " is complete nonsense in any sense.

[jamie_designer]

Which government would that be?

Finlands government

And which currency?

The Euro

Care to tell us just how indebted the state is hereabouts?

I have read as of 2007 Finlands public debt is 32% of GDP which would work out to be around 56 billion dollars

And what the borrowing requirements have been over the past decade?

Well Finlands been part of the EU since 1995 so I am sure its under the requirements of the EMU, European System of Central Banks and the state owned Bank of Finland

[Tiwaz]

You are aware, or rather you are not, that in situation we speak of the stores would raise prices to cover their costs not because of inflation.

That would come on top of everything else. So you would have inflation AND increased store expenses to hike up the prices.
But I guess that person who does not think Ayn Rand to be an imbecile would not pay attention to such "minor" detail.

[jamie_designer]

are aware, or rather you are not, that in situation we speak of the stores would raise prices to cover their costs not because of inflation. That would come on top of everything else. So you would have inflation AND increased store expenses to hike up the prices.

I was actually aware of what you were saying but since your example is purely speculation and relies on a number of different circumstances happening which I happen to be skeptical of I decided to give a very real and serious example of rise in price. inflation. But let say that stores did raise prices well then people would just complain to the government that price of living went up and the government would step in and force companies to pay their employees more.

But I guess that person who does not think Ayn Rand to be an imbecile would not pay attention to such "minor" detail.

Is that even supposed to mean something?

[sammy]

1. I wouldn't say they differ at all, both statements show a preference for X, as you have written them their they are logically the same statement.
2. Yes that is correct
3. lets assign your example a value of X. If a person then believes X they are neither right nor wrong. If a person says " I believe X" what they are saying is my personal preference is towards X.
4. Well they differ in the way that " I like X " is understandable and " I feel X is right " is complete nonsense in any sense.

Well then the question remains, if "I like X" is logically the same as "I personally believe that X" (see your answers to points 1 & 3) - how can the other example be a non-arguable issue and the other arguable? Cue:

"When you say ... I would like stores to stay closed on Sunday,..thats the same thing as saying "I like blue". If someone then replies "I like green" there is no argument to be made."

vs.

"I dismiss this quite easily, because I personally believe that its not the governments job to keep businesses open. Some of you might have another point of view on that, so its arguable."

Ah-hah, one might say, but the first is merely a question of aesthetic opinion, whilst the latter is a value/moral judgement on a social issue (incorporating the concepts "right" and "wrong", and those -or more precisely- the belief in those is somehow superior to a mere liking ie. preference). But how does that go with what you wrote under 3? ("If a person then believes X they are neither right nor wrong").

The trickiest part is still to come. If "I feel X is right" is nonsense, is "I know X is right" any better (especially in social issues, when other things than just one's own personal truths, likings and preferences are at stake?) Hence my bringing up the "Archimedes' point". I can't say I have such knowledge myself.

Let's forsake all ideas of an absolute truth (ie absolute right and wrong) - then we must presume that what is deemed as "right" or "wrong" in any given society is defined by that society itself. Or do you mean to say that socially constructed truths (concerning "right" and "wrong") are essentially nonsense as well? Hint: usually these social truths are defined by laws, which in turn are fashioned by governments - usually democratic ones, but in some cases also formed by individuals, but we know a song about that don't we (check the last bit in Otyikondo's "template thread" above)

Erm. Straying a bit far here from the original post (Q: are the shops open? A: yes. *end of story* )

(edit: as said earlier, the opening times themselves are not really an issue at all to me, and I'm no economist so I won't argue too much on the possible economic benefits/losses caused by a prospective policy change... I just got intrigued by these societal & logical issues in general - some aspects of which seemed to contain argumentative discrepancies IMO - sorry if I'm boring you all to bits!)

[hanj]

bet ilikepeanutbutter never thought his/her simple question became a full blown discussion...

[antstar]

bet ilikepeanutbutter never thought his/her simple question became a full blown discussion...

Nope, these lot with argue about any old crap if there's no american politics thread around!

[hanj]

wonder if i post something like...'my fish just died' ....would it turn into another political argument.

[Jukka Aho]

wonder if i post something like...'my fish just died' ....would it turn into another political argument.

I feel I’m compelled to point to the old discussion forum wisdom about the nature of discussion threads again.

Debates – when done in a civilized way, between two intelligent and educated individuals, in a point-counterpoint fashion, giving valid and thoughtful reasoning and clarifications for each of the points they’re making – are the most interesting kind of content on discussion forums, anyway. Not the least because it’s fun to see the inner workings and logic (or lack of thereof!) of someone’s mind and values (which will usually be revealed during the course of a longer discussion) and how some people will just totally lose it instead of calmly accepting their defeat when their original arguments have been shot down one by one and they’re cornered.

[otyikondo]

Which government would that be?

Finlands government

And which currency?

The Euro

Care to tell us just how indebted the state is hereabouts?

I have read as of 2007 Finlands public debt is 32% of GDP which would work out to be around 56 billion dollars

And what the borrowing requirements have been over the past decade?

Well Finlands been part of the EU since 1995 so I am sure its under the requirements of the EMU, European System of Central Banks and the state owned Bank of Finland

Perhaps you are unaware that rather than borrowing more, the Finnish government paid off 3 billion in state debt at the end of last year and that Finland has the second-lowest level of state indebtedness to GDP in the European Union, is a poster-child for the S&G Pact, and that it has reduced government debt consistently from 48.3% of GDP (1998) to 32% of GDP in the past decade?

So much for borrowing.

Though it is by no means all Finland's doing, since we are part of a club these days, the devaluation of the currency, of course, is a matter of common knowledge. Why, the poor euro has devalued so much in the past two years that we wonder if it will soon exist at all.

Your blinkers are showing. Not all governments are evil, just as doubtless not all Randians are sophomoronic.

[antstar]

i'm just wondering if George Bush has a favourite colour? sorry color

[hanj]

i'm just wondering if George Bush has a favourite colour? sorry color

i'd say green....greenback

[jamie_designer]

Perhaps you are unaware that rather than borrowing more, the Finnish government paid off 3 billion in state debt at the end of last year and that Finland has the second-lowest level of state indebtedness to GDP in the European Union, is a poster-child for the S&G Pact, and that it has reduced government debt consistently from 48.3% of GDP (1998) to 32% of GDP in the past decade?

I was and was not aware of that, I wasn't aware that the Finnish government had paid off 3 billion dollars at the end of last year, I wasn't aware that it ranked second lowest in EU countries for public debt. So thank you for pointing that out to me. I was aware that Finland has continued to reduce debt since joing the EU as EMU has certain rules its members must meet. So just once again Thank you for the information.

So much for borrowing.

Well I had not previously had that information, I promise to take a look at that and stay neutral on the subject until such time I feel confident of the facts. So for now, I stand corrected.

Though it is by no means all Finland's doing, since we are part of a club these days, the devaluation of the currency, of course, is a matter of common knowledge. Why, the poor euro has devalued so much in the past two years that we wonder if it will soon exist at all. Your blinkers are showing. Not all governments are evil, just as doubtless not all Randians are sophomoronic.

You know I'm not your door mat otyikondo, and I'm not here to insult other people or be insulted. So if you have something constructive to add to one of my post, please do it. If you feel I need correcting, please correct me. But please don't take cheap shots at me thats all I have to say to you.