Speakers + Receiver Package Recommendation

[tossurboss2002]

I am regular reader of this forum, Each and every one of you are pros in sound. I am not so techinically in sound though, but i like to listen to loud music with decent punch and movies ofcourse.
After i did some audition i have shortlisted the below set up. I am forced to buy from BEST BUY the receiver as i have $550 gift card and the speakers i am looking is not available in best buy though.
Mains : Polk RTi8 (349*2)
Center : Polk CSi3 (199.00)
Sorround(book shelf) : Polk RTi 4
Subwoofer : VELODYNE DPS-12 ( 549.00)
Receiver : Yamaha 5960BL(500.00) - This i have to buy from BB as i have to use the Gift card.

For the speakers and sub i have options to buy from outside. Is this speaker package goes with the receiver that i have selected..? or do you guys have any recommendations for the money i am planning to spend over here. Total speaker 5.1 package is totalling up to 1709 + tax. Could you please take a look at this and suggest me if i am spending the decent amount for the quality of sound i will be getting from the above. my budgest was 1500 for 5.1 now it has crossed so could you please make your recommendations.

[KaiWinters]

I have the RX version of the receiver and love it. Plenty of power and features. Great sound to my ears.
Can't speak of the speakers.
Good luck.

[likeitloud]

Looks like a good combo to me. Everythings matched, good receiver, should sound
good. I have heard a pair of RTi8's alone in 2ch mode, and they really sounded nice.

Pioneer VSX1015TX
Rotel RB 1080
JBL Northridge E150 Powered Sub
JBL 4344 Studio Monitors(Front)
JBL L 19 (Surrounds)
JBL Cinema Vison CVCEN50 Center
JBL Northridge Satellites(Back Channel)
Pioneer Elite DV45A DVDA/SACD
Panasonic DVD F86K
Sony RCD W500C CD PLAYER/REC
Pioneer GR-777 Graphic Equalizer
AR Interconnects
Cobalt 14G Wire
Sanus Stands
XBOX 360

[tossurboss2002]

I had to opt for this HTR series becoz BB is not carrying the RX series as i have to use my Gift card. By any chance do you know is there any performance differnece between the HTR and RX series, When I compared the specs the only difference i saw was RX are dual zones and HTR 5960BL is not dual zone.

[drseid]

I think you are good to go on the receiver, and the sub looks fine too (although brands like Hsu and SVS are other good possibilities)... The speakers I would recommend looking at other possibilities are the Polks. I know a lot of folks over here are fans, but I confess I am not one of them. Last time I heard some (about 3/4 of a year ago) I was not impressed at all, moreso to the contrary. The speakers were in a surround sound format like you are looking at, and the sound was quite muddy IMO. This is just one person's opinion and it is not by any means a consensus... Just like anything, if the Polks sound great to you, then they are the right choice, if something else sounds better to you in the same price range, then that might be the way to go. I just recommend that you listen to some other stuff out there for comparison purposes. Some other brands that you could use as comparisons in the same price range are Athena, Definitive Technology and Rega.


Good luck,

---Dave

[audio_dude]

I have a HTR-5890 that is being used as the "main stereo" (not the big stereo, the one that plays through the house) with 2 mission m35i tower speakers. I've pushed this thing near its max volume, and it hasn't distorted a bit!

(one comment about these speakers though, you can turn the volume up to massive levels, yet the speaker cones never "move" thats how good the port and design of the case are!)

[Woochifer]

I have a HTR-5890 that is being used as the "main stereo" (not the big stereo, the one that plays through the house) with 2 mission m35i tower speakers. I've pushed this thing near its max volume, and it hasn't distorted a bit!

(one comment about these speakers though, you can turn the volume up to massive levels, yet the speaker cones never "move" thats how good the port and design of the case are!)

By design the cones on ported speakers are supposed to move less as the signal gets closer to the tuned port frequency, and the cone movement is dampened by the air volume inside the cabinet. But, once the signal goes below the tuned port frequency, then the cone movement can be significant because it's no longer dampened by the back pressure from the port. If the cones on your speakers don't move much, that's simply because the signal doesn't go down past the frequency at which the drivers unload.

[superpanavision70mm]

Are you able to use the Gift Card online as well?

[tossurboss2002]

I can use only on www.bestbuy.com, but i am open for speaker and sub to buy online from other stores where it can work out bit cheaper and i can avoid tax too.

[njspeer]

You can sell your gift certificate on eBay. You should be able to recoup about 95% of the value.

[nightflier]

Have you considered one of the Best Buy stores with Magnolia departments inside the store? They have much higher-quality stuff.

Take it from someone who's had to try and spend BB gift certificates several times now: tell your friends and relatives that BB is anathema to decent selection - refrigerator salesmen/women can't tell the difference between Bose & Martin Logan, nor do they care to. It's insulting the way that "friends & family" just presume that all electronics are alike. If I wanted to really irk an audiophile, I'd give them a BB gift certificate just to watch them wander the store in utter frustration and disgust.

Ask for a Visa gift card next time.

(Sorry about my rant, but the walmartization of the electronics industry is just appaling and somebody has to say something)

[njspeer]

Have you considered one of the Best Buy stores with Magnolia departments inside the store? They have much higher-quality stuff.

Take it from someone who's had to try and spend BB gift certificates several times now: tell your friends and relatives that BB is anathema to decent selection - refrigerator salesmen/women can't tell the difference between Bose & Martin Logan, nor do they care to. It's insulting the way that "friends & family" just presume that all electronics are alike. If I wanted to really irk an audiophile, I'd give them a BB gift certificate just to watch them wander the store in utter frustration and disgust.

Ask for a Visa gift card next time.

(Sorry about my rant, but the walmartization of the electronics industry is just appaling and somebody has to say something)

Best Buy is simply supplying people with what they want. To be completely honest I'm a little shocked that such things, which are a natural result of free-market economics BTW, would be appaling [sic] to you. There's also a free-market explanation for the educational level of Best Buy sales people. If you thought about it for a few minutes, I'm sure you could figure it out. And why bring Wal-Mart into this? What in the hell has Wal-Mart ever done to anyone? Blindly following the I-hate-Wal-Mart crowd is just weak. People need to think for themselves. If you don't like Wal-Mart, don't shop there. It's as simple as that.

By the way, it's interesting that you should compare Bose to Martin Logan. My wife and I were at the Tweeters on North Michigan Ave. a couple of months ago, and we were able to listen to a pair of $3,000 Martin Logans. They were a complete and utter disgrace compared to my 30-year old, $275 Bose 901s. Even my wife (with out any influence from me) commented that the music sounded like it was coming out of a tin can, and it really did.

[topspeed]

Let's not turn this into another Bose thread, nj. We all know you're a fanboy.

BOT:
Like Dave, I'm not a huge fan of Polks. The LSi series are nice, but still a bit loose and boomy for my taste. Great for hip hop tho, which according to BillBoard is what most people listen to.

The thing is, sound quality is so subjective, it would be irresponsible for any member to say "This is the best!" The only one that can do that is you. The key is to listen to as many different speakers as you can until you find the one that sounds best to you. In addition to the other recommendation, you might consider (along with their matching centers) speakers such as the Epos ELS3, Energy C3, or the NHT Classic 2 (which on clearance at audioadvisor.com for $174 each...a great price). It's possible to squeeze 5 Magnepan MMG's into your price range, but asking a Yammie AVR to drive 5 Maggies could be constituted as cruel and unusual punishment in some states. Velo makes a good sub, so you should be fine.

Good luck and I hope this helps.

[nightflier]

njspeer,

I could go an write a long response, but let's just leave it at: I disagree with your whole post, from the defense of BB to the bashing of the MLs. That's just my experience and my opinion, sorry.

[tossurboss2002]

Thanks for all the responses, I will definitely look into all the options you guys have put in, I know i can be flexible in buying speaker system online. So definitely i will try to find out some stores in houston where i can go and audition the options u guys have put in and decide. I appreciate for all your time.

Thanks

[njspeer]

Let's not turn this into another Bose thread, nj. We all know you're a fanboy.

I find it amusing that nightflier bashes Bose in his post, and when I respond, all of the sudden I'm the one trying to turn this form into "another Bose thread."

[nightflier]

Best Buy is simply supplying people with what they want. To be completely honest I'm a little shocked that such things, which are a natural result of free-market economics BTW, would be appaling [sic] to you.

OK, in the low-fi market, what is left? GG went bust, CC is on its last legs, and BB is all that is left. At BB, the idea is to sell everything that has a plug for the wall. They stay in business not by providing decent products, but by making up sales shortages with entirely different product lines. Rather than bettering the original product line, they don't really care about it - it languishes on the shelf, gets abused by evryone and everything, gets sold as-is (if it still has a pulse), and the product line is discarded. They don't want to fix any these problems because they have enough other product lines to rely on. This process is bad for individual product lines, whole brand-names, customer choice, neighboring small businesses who compete in that market segment, and ultimately leads to a warehouse store with just a few mass-selling products. Sort of the crisis that Office Depot and Staples are struggling with. Actually this unchecked convergence in large warehouse stores is becoming more & more like Walmart (more on that later).


There's also a free-market explanation for the educational level of Best Buy sales people. If you thought about it for a few minutes, I'm sure you could figure it out.

No need to be insulting. The problem with this logic is that it still leaves us with uneducated sales reps, unhappy customers, product returns, and higher overhead that then has to recycled into higher prices. Maybe someone would think that's OK because they can make this up in volume or on another product line. Well I think this is not OK, but that's just me.


And why bring Wal-Mart into this? What in the hell has Wal-Mart ever done to anyone? Blindly following the I-hate-Wal-Mart crowd is just weak. People need to think for themselves. If you don't like Wal-Mart, don't shop there. It's as simple as that.

I can't believe I need to esplain this. The problem is that Walmart sucks the blood out of all the products, people, communities, and countries that it touches. The top brass at Walmart have vocalized this in no uncertain terms: they don't care about anything except profitablity. So if they have to use child labor, pay off corrupt politicians, torture people, bust (and I use the term figuratively and literally) unions, destroy the environment, obliterate small businesses, wipe out whole neighborhoods, and pit its own employees off against each other, they'll do it. And by the way, their prices are no better than Target or K-mart, in case anyone wants to check. If you need a refresher course on what the free market is not, just do a search for "Walmart" on google.


By the way, it's interesting that you should compare Bose to Martin Logan. My wife and I were at the Tweeters on North Michigan Ave. a couple of months ago, and we were able to listen to a pair of $3,000 Martin Logans. They were a complete and utter disgrace compared to my 30-year old, $275 Bose 901s. Even my wife (with out any influence from me) commented that the music sounded like it was coming out of a tin can, and it really did.

OK, I'm at a loss here - are you just desperate for responses? Granted, the 901's are a notch above the plastic & paper crap that Bose is now selling for 10x what it cost them to make & market it, but they are not great sounding speakers by any stretch. My roommate had a pair of these in college and we used to laugh at how pathetic they were. I'm amazed yours are still in one piece, considering the poor workmanship. I can only conclude that our opinions are just too far appart to have a meaningful discussion. Like my philosophy professor used to say: "Once you leave the bounds of reason, there is no meaningful discussion left to be had."


I find it amusing that nightflier bashes Bose in his post, and when I respond, all of the sudden I'm the one trying to turn this form into "another Bose thread."


I only picked ML & Bose as opposite extremes of sound, quality, size, power, value, etc. (the list goes on), that are widely available. I didn't realize there was anyone out there who would actually see the world upside down. I certainly had no idea that you had recently compared these two (what a coincidence). I am only left with one question: why did you?

...unless, you were just trying to get a rise out of someone.

In that case, you got me. Bravo.

[bobsticks]

I sooo very much don't want any part of this argument, except to say at the thought that Wal-Mart "totures people" I suddenly got a vision of some 90 year-old woman in a blue vest beating up a welfare mom and her six illegitimate kids :mad2: ...


...absolutely hilarious...borderline libelous but absolutely hilarious!!!

Cheers

[nightflier]

at the thought that Wal-Mart "totures people" I suddenly got a vision of some 90 year-old woman in a blue vest beating up a welfare mom and her six illegitimate kids ...absolutely hilarious...borderline libelous but absolutely hilarious!!!

Bob,

I know you don't want to get into this, which is fine, but I should clarify that this is well documented and it is certainly not libelous. Walmart has over 10,000 supliers abroad in countries like Myanmar, Bangladesh, Honduras (remember Kathie Lee Gifford's Walmart fiasco?), and China. In China alone, they own 3000 factories. There have been several well documented cases where allegations of rape, beatings, and union leaders being tortured and mutilated as examples, were made. When Red Cross workers, Doctors Withough Borders, and UN human rights workers were sent there, they were barred from visiting the factories, employees who were found out to have made the complaints were killed or disappeared, and thugs even threatened the aid workers themselves. I have a cousin who was stationed abroad who can tell you stories that will turn your stomach.

And for those who think this is unique to the apparel industry, let's not discount the abuses in the electronics industry. According to a scathing report by the Catholic Agency for Overseas Development in 2004, this industry suffers from the same abuses in addition to rampant polution and employee exposure problems. Several other organizations have published similar reports. Many of us rely on the promisses that an American manufacturer of hi-fi electronics (B&K, Martin Logan, Krell, etc.) with their high prices must therefore be guilt-free of this paradigm. The truth is that many of these manufacturers still buy their parts from countries were labor conditions are appaling. In all likelyhood, the mercury in that battery was put there by little fingers working 10-hour days.

Now, granted we may not see this in our local Walmart, but these workers in other countries are still employees of Walmart. Just because they don't wear blue vests and greet people at the door here in the US (something they would gladly trade residence for, I'm sure), they should still be treated fairly. And for those who think Walmart is treating it's American employees well, consider that it was company policy to clock low-level employees out w/o their knowledge or consent (this case was settled out of court). This is also the company that was found guilty of taking out life insurance policies on 350,000 of it's own employees w/o their knowledge in 2002. Even here in Inglewood, California "Walmart had tried to circumvent the city council, which demanded a public hearing and environmental study, and take its case directly to the voters," a move that fortunately failed with the community voting 60% against the new super-store construction. The list goes on. There are several well researched books on the abuses of Walmart both here & abroad, so I won't belabor the point.

But to laugh this off as "hilarious" is an insult to the people who are suffering these inequities.

I believe in fair markets and I would like to see that people who disagree with these policies take their money elsewhere. But if there are just a few very large chains who provide 90% of the products in our lives, this competition is no longer possible. Abuses such as the ones witnesed with Walmart are rampant because there is no where else to take one's dollars. Best Buy is becoming very similar to Walmart, that was my point.

[bobsticks]

Hey 'flier,
We're all aware of injustices done in other countries. I doubt anyone finds them humorous. It could be argued that they are perpetrated by agents of the suppliers and not WM themselves, but we'll leave that destinction to others.
I've never read an irresponsible post from you and, therefore, will assume that there's pretty good documentation for the incidents that you describe. Again, I concede the point. Moreso because it wasn't the focus of my post.
For the record, the vision of Clara "where's the beef?" Peller in my head was what I found hilarious...I mean, I got her layin' the smack down!!

No mas,
M

[njspeer]

nightflier,

Just a couple general remarks and an exercise to help you figure this out for yourself:

(1) Only a fool would take a philosophy professor seriously. Philosophy professors are some of the stupidest people alive, and philosophy classes are some of the few classes that actually make you dumber after you've taken them.

(2) You're analysis of Wal-Mart and Best Buy reads like it came strait off Ward Churchill's website. Instead of taking philosophy classes in college, maybe you should have taken classes that actually help you think for yourself.

(3) Home Work Assignmen: Almost all economic phenomena can be explained in terms of supply and demand. (A) Try to explain the economic success of the Best Buy and Wal-Mart models in terms of supply and demand. (B) Before opening its doors on January 27, the Evergreen Park Wal-Mart, located just one block south of the Chicago city limits, received over 25,000 applications for 325 jobs, 90% of which came from Chicago residents. Again, in terms of supply and demand, explain why so many people applied for so few jobs at the Evergreen Park Wal-Mart. (C) As measured by free-market economics, is Evergreen Park better or worse off with the addition of a new Wal-Mart store? Explain why.

[nightflier]

njspeer,

1. To say that anyone group of people "are some of the stupidest people alive" is illogical, inacurate, and cannot be verified. It is also bigotted.

2. My points were taken from a host of sources. I can list them all, if you like, but that would not be appropriate on this thread, nor would I waste my time justifying myself to someone who is obviously not interested in a reasonable discussion.

3. Instead of asking me to do a homework "assignmen," why don't you check some of the sources online? I'm not making this stuff up. The simple point is that Walmart abuses its employees. This has been demonstrated in court multiple times. That people apply for jobs at one store, says nothing about this. So let's stick to the topic, shall we.

I was merely stating that BB has a less than adequate selection because they are becoming increasingly like Walmart. Their selection is converging towards a few well-selling products. This is a disservice to all, and eventually will be a disservice to their business model as well. According to many writers (not philosophers, don't worry), it's why the super warehouse stores are contributing to mediocre product quality in our homes. In my original comment, I was merely telling tossurboss that BB is not the ideal place to shop for electronics.

Now if you could just for a minute stop insulting and just consider the argument I'm making, maybe you might see that there is some truth to it.

I apologize to the other readers & posters, especially tossurboss, that this thread has unraveled like this. It certainly was not my intention, but sometimes things have to be clarified for the record.

[njspeer]

njspeer,

1. To say that anyone group of people "are some of the stupidest people alive" is illogical, inacurate, and cannot be verified. It is also bigotted.

"Bigotted?" Heheh, your jedi-polical-correctness mind tricks will not work on me. Moreover, your philosophy education clearly didn't include any courses in logic.

Counter Example 1:
"The group of people who have IQs less than 60 are some of the stupidest people alive." This sentence is logically true (i.e. A priori true), accurate, and doesn't require independent verification, but most certainly could be verified.

Counter Example 2:
"The group of people who huff glue are some of the stupidest people alive:" This sentence is logically possible, Statistically accurate, Prima facie true, and most certainly could be verified.


2. My points were taken from a host of sources. I can list them all, if you like, but that would not be appropriate on this thread, nor would I waste my time justifying myself to someone who is obviously not interested in a reasonable discussion.

3. Instead of asking me to do a homework "assignmen," why don't you check some of the sources online? I'm not making this stuff up. The simple point is that Walmart abuses its employees. This has been demonstrated in court multiple times. That people apply for jobs at one store, says nothing about this. So let's stick to the topic, shall we.

Yeah, I agree it's hard to explain why so many chicago residents wanted to work at Wal-Mart when all they're going to do is get tortured. Maybe they wanted to be tortured. Or ... maybe you should stop believing everything you read on Michael Moore's website.

BTW, I still don't see how factory conditions in Red China is Wal-Mart's fault. You still didn't quite explain that one. Common sense would put the blame squarely on the Chi Coms, not Wal-Mart, but apparently when it comes to Wal-Mart we don't use common sense. But even then, your argument doesn't make sense. Even if you refuse to use common sense and insist on blaming the consumers for the bad conditions in China, you would still have to blame all the consumers (I.e. the entire world), including the Chinese. To say it's all Wal-Mart's fault is about the most dishonest argument you could possibly make, and I don't care what Michael Moore says.

While were at it, I'll clue you into a little secret: Those left wing commies that hate Wal-Mart don't care about children being tortured in third world countries. They hate Wal-Mart for a different reason.

[nightflier]

It's amazing how dimwitted people will defend their indefensible point of view more and more as it is further challenged. Kind of reminds one of a dictator in the throws of defeat. So let's see how deep this hole can be dug...


Heheh, your jedi-polical-correctness mind tricks will not work on me.

Well now we know were you got your education. George Lucas would be proud. And yes, your assertion was bigotted - look it up, you might learn a new 5c word you can use in the future (not the fantasy future, let's stay focused).


Moreover, your philosophy education clearly didn't include any courses in logic.

You don't know me, so don't make any assumptions about my education. I happen to know a thing or two about argumentation, and as far as logic is concerned, your infantile tricks of changing the original argument are getting borring and oh so, dare I say, typical of a politician. Are you running for office? If so, you'll be in like company.


"The group of people who have IQs less than 60... The group of people who huff glue are some of the stupidest people alive"

Wait a minute, aren't you philosophising, now? I thought you said that "philosophers were the stupidest people in the world"? Well let's not dwell on that, you could get lost. The point is you changed the original premise. You did not originally say anything about IQ's or huff glue. You originally said: "Philosophy professors are some of the stupidest people alive." Whether we are talking about philosophy professors or any other group of people, including a group of actual "stupid people" whatever that may be, the statement cannot be substantiated in any way. No need for logic to know that. It is patently false. My guess is that your inability to argue a point forces you to change its original premise.

Are you sure you're old enough to be on this forum? Just as drunks should not drive, some people should not post, my friend.


Yeah, I agree it's hard to explain why so many chicago residents wanted to work at Wal-Mart when all they're going to do is get tortured. Maybe they wanted to be tortured. Or ... maybe you should stop believing everything you read on Michael Moore's website.

Never been to his website. He has a website? I'll check it out. Again, this says nothing about my point that Walmart employees are being abused. Just because new employees (who may or may not know about this abuse) want to work there, does not negate the existing abuse (different people, get it?). You have made it your mission to disprove any allegations of abuse, but your argument makes no such case.


BTW, I still don't see how factory conditions in Red China is Wal-Mart's fault. You still didn't quite explain that one.

Walmart owns 3000 factories in China. Many of those, actually the majority of those, were the ones under investigation for employee abuse. Walmart also owns factories in Honduras, Myanmar, VietNam, well the list goes on. One of the factories in Honduras was the one that Kathie Lee Gifford was horrified to find out her fancy over-priced Walmart-purchased clothes were coming from. It employed 12 year-old girls and was run by Walmart paid thugs who routinely beat the employees. Maybe this is not concrete evidence for you enough? And no, this did not come from Michael Moore or some liberal website, it is straight out of the LA Times.

I really think you need to read more. Ahem, can you read? Since you're not undersatnding my post and not able to read the references online, I'm wondering.


...Red China... Chi Coms...left wing commies

You know the cold war is over, right? China, while still very repressive, is not at all a communist country anymore. They are actually putting "commies" behind bars, now. If you actaully read any newspapers, you might know this. In fact, they are running their country like a big corporation more than a communist state; it's actually been compared to a fascist state by political scientists (Fascism is the furthest thing from Communism, in case you didn't know). But now we're getting into economics and political science; I don't want to overwhelm you. And, uh... "Chi Coms?" Yeah, I do think you're a biggot. You may want to stop before you pull that brown shirt out of the closet....


blaming the consumers for the bad conditions in China, you would still have to blame all the consumers (I.e. the entire world), including the Chinese. To say it's all Wal-Mart's fault is about the most dishonest argument you could possibly make, and I don't care what Michael Moore says.

Now you're just ranting. I guess that's the normal progression when logic fails. Where did I blame the consumers? I'm pretty sure there was nothing of the sort in my post. I also didn't say it was all Walmart's fault. They are bad, to be sure, but if you actually apid attention to what I was saying, I am showing that it's a process of which Walmart is a glowing example. The problem is not Walmart, but the process. Again, this may be getting too abstract for you. Anyhow, your in the ranting phase, so I'll let you simmer for a while.


I don't care what Michael Moore says.

Neither do I, really.


While were at it, I'll clue you into a little secret: Those left wing commies that hate Wal-Mart don't care about children being tortured in third world countries. They hate Wal-Mart for a different reason.

OK, I'll let you in on a little secret too. There are so few left wing "commies" left that it really does not matter. But what does matter is that you don't seem to care about "children being tortured in third world countries." So much so that you don't want to believe it's actually happening. Denying it, won't make it go away. Sticking your head in the sand, won't do any good either. And don't even start with the ubiquitous "they probably deserve it..." argument. People who go down that road are marching right along with the worst dictators in history.

Look we can go on and on about this and make you look more and more like those philosophers you hate so much, but it's way off topic and does not help tossurboss or all the people who read these posts for product info and technical tips. If you want to continue this, maybe you should PM, instead, - it will be less humiliating for you.

Again, my apologies to everyone else. This is my last post here.

[njspeer]

Well now we know were [sic] you got your education. George Lucas would be proud. And yes, your assertion was bigotted [sic] - look it up, you might learn a new 5c word you can use in the future (not the fantasy future, let's stay focused).

I'm bigoted against philosophy professors, and you're bigoted against Wal-Mart. Everyone's a bigot if you apply the word that loosely. So what? Why even point it out, unless you were trying to play some sort of PC gotcha game?



You don't know me, so don't make any assumptions about my education. I happen to know a thing or two about argumentation, and as far as logic is concerned, your infantile tricks of changing the original argument are getting borring [sic] and oh so, dare I say, typical of a politician. Are you running for office? If so, you'll be in like company.

It's clear to me that you either never took a course in logic, or you did, but didn't learn anything from it. You made the general claim: "To say that anyone [sic] group of people "are some of the stupidest people alive" is illogical, inacurate [sic], and cannot be verified." I gave you two counter examples of groups of people who most clearly are some of the stupidest people alive. I wasn't trying to change the original argument; I was simply proving (yes proving) your statement to be false by giving you counter examples. If you had taken a logic class in college you would have known that counter examples are standard procedure in such a situation. Moreover, your use of the word 'illogical' was incorrect. A sentence is illogical when it has a form that is self-contradictory. For example: "all I know is that I know nothing." Or: "The only rule is: there are no rules." Those sentences could be said to be illogical, but there is nothing illogical about claiming a group of people are stupid. Furthermore, to say that such a claim can't be verified is just nonsense. Any such claim most certainly could be verified. Haven't you heard of science?



Wait a minute, aren't you philosophising [sic], now? I thought you said that "philosophers were the stupidest people in the world"?


While it can be argued that all branches of knowledge and inquiry are instances of philosophy, what I said was: "Philosophy professors are some of the stupidest people alive." Philosophizing and actually being a philosophy professor are two different things. We all philosophize now and then, but only a fool would actually want to make a living out of doubting his own existence, or writing books on the ontology of predicates.



Walmart owns 3000 factories in China. Many of those, actually the majority of those, were the ones under investigation for employee abuse. Walmart also owns factories in Honduras, Myanmar, VietNam, well the list goes on. One of the factories in Honduras was the one that Kathie Lee Gifford was horrified to find out her fancy over-priced Walmart-purchased clothes were coming from. It employed 12 year-old girls and was run by Walmart paid thugs who routinely beat the employees. Maybe this is not concrete evidence for you enough? And no, this did not come from Michael Moore or some liberal website, it is straight out of the LA Times.


I've never heard of Wal-Mart owning 3000 factories in China. Could you please post your references?

[GMichael]

Thank you guys. I was worried that we would never have another spirited thread here at AR. Now I feel much better. Please, carry on.

[shokhead]

I'm bigoted against philosophy professors, and you're bigoted against Wal-Mart. Everyone's a bigot if you apply the word that loosely. So what? Why even point it out, unless you were trying to play some sort of PC gotcha game?



It's clear to me that you either never took a course in logic, or you did, but didn't learn anything from it. You made the general claim: "To say that anyone [sic] group of people "are some of the stupidest people alive" is illogical, inacurate [sic], and cannot be verified." I gave you two counter examples of groups of people who most clearly are some of the stupidest people alive. I wasn't trying to change the original argument; I was simply proving (yes proving) your statement to be false by giving you counter examples. If you had taken a logic class in college you would have known that counter examples are standard procedure in such a situation. Moreover, your use of the word 'illogical' was incorrect. A sentence is illogical when it has a form that is self-contradictory. For example: "all I know is that I know nothing." Or: "The only rule is: there are no rules." Those sentences could be said to be illogical, but there is nothing illogical about claiming a group of people are stupid. Furthermore, to say that such a claim can't be verified is just nonsense. Any such claim most certainly could be verified. Haven't you heard of science?



While it can be argued that all branches of knowledge and inquiry are instances of philosophy, what I said was: "Philosophy professors are some of the stupidest people alive." Philosophizing and actually being a philosophy professor are two different things. We all philosophize now and then, but only a fool would actually want to make a living out of doubting his own existence, or writing books on the ontology of predicates.



I've never heard of Wal-Mart owning 3000 factories in China. Could you please post your references?


Is someone a bigot if they dislike Bose?

[kexodusc]

"Philosophy professors are some of the stupidest people alive."

It would seem to me the few skills you did pick up in whatever critical thinking courses you did happen to absorb can be attributed directly or indirectly to the teachings and/or writings of a philosophy professor...most of who certainly are not stupid.

As for Wal-Mart, most economists agree that they've long since abandonned abiding by the rules of supply and demand in a free market...fair market prices follow supply and demand, predatory tactics and profit maximization instead focus on manipulating the relationship between them.

I'm no Wal-Mart basher (cause dammit they're so cheap) but you'd have to be living under a rock not to have stumbled across at least some of their unethical business practices, attack on civil rights, and blatant disregard for inconvenient law.

[nightflier]

I've never heard of Wal-Mart owning 3000 factories in China. Could you please post your references?

njspeer,

I didn't want to contribute to this post anymore because I didn't want to beat a dead philosopher, but you asked for a reference:

From and article by Saul Landau & Farrah Hassen, paragraph 12:

"Indeed, in order to bring the consumers what they need -- that $8.63 polo shirt the Scrooges who run Wal-Mart extract cheap prices from 10,000 suppliers abroad, such as in Honduras, Bangladesh and China, the latter where Wal-Mart owns over 3,000 factories."

http://www.counterpunch.org/landau05132004.html

[njspeer]

njspeer,

I didn't want to contribute to this post anymore because I didn't want to beat a dead philosopher, but you asked for a reference:

From and article by Saul Landau & Farrah Hassen, paragraph 12:

"Indeed, in order to bring the consumers what they need -- that $8.63 polo shirt the Scrooges who run Wal-Mart extract cheap prices from 10,000 suppliers abroad, such as in Honduras, Bangladesh and China, the latter where Wal-Mart owns over 3,000 factories."

http://www.counterpunch.org/landau05132004.html




Ok, fine, you start this whole thing by bad-mouthing Best Buy employees, Wal-Mart, and our capitalistic system, and now you don't want to "contribute to this post anymore." Fine. But to site Counter Punch as your only reference??!! You've got to be s**ting me. That's your reference? In an earlier post you claimed to be citing the LA Times. In fact, you're exact quote was: "And no, this did not come from Michael Moore or some liberal website, it is straight out of the LA Times." You don't think Counter Punch is a liberal website? You can't possibly be so out of touch as to think counterpunch.org is an acceptable reference. Counterpunch.org is one of the most disreputable sources on the internet. Just to put everything into perspective: Counter Punch newsletter actually criticized Michael Moore's Fahrenheit 911 for not going far enough in it's criticism of George Bush. Yes, while the rest of the rational, honest world was shocked and appalled at the wanton dishonesty of Moore's film the Counter Punch Newsletter writes a piece criticizing the film for not being critical enough of Bush. The fact that you even read Counter Punch tells me everything I need to know.

[GMichael]

Defender of Common Sense?:crazy:

[Woochifer]

Ok, fine, you start this whole thing by bad-mouthing Best Buy employees, Wal-Mart, and our capitalistic system, and now you don't want to "contribute to this post anymore." Fine. But to site Counter Punch as your only reference??!! You've got to be s**ting me. That's your reference? In an earlier post you claimed to be citing the LA Times. In fact, you're exact quote was: "And no, this did not come from Michael Moore or some liberal website, it is straight out of the LA Times." You don't think Counter Punch is a liberal website? You can't possibly be so out of touch as to think counterpunch.org is an acceptable reference. Counterpunch.org is one of the most disreputable sources on the internet. Just to put everything into perspective: Counter Punch newsletter actually criticized Michael Moore's Fahrenheit 911 for not going far enough in it's criticism of George Bush. Yes, while the rest of the rational, honest world was shocked and appalled at the wanton dishonesty of Moore's film the Counter Punch Newsletter writes a piece criticizing the film for not being critical enough of Bush. The fact that you even read Counter Punch tells me everything I need to know.

For someone who gets off on asking for references, you sure make a helluva load of unsubstantiated assertions of your own!

So, what does your opinion of one specific website have anything to do with any of the aforementioned points regarding Wal-Mart or Bose or what not? Attacking the messenger, the source, or the purported intelligence of philosphy professors does not make for a "common sense" response. And I notice that you conveniently evaded Kex's points.

[Woochifer]

It would seem to me the few skills you did pick up in whatever critical thinking courses you did happen to absorb can be attributed directly or indirectly to the teachings and/or writings of a philosophy professor...most of who certainly are not stupid.

As for Wal-Mart, most economists agree that they've long since abandonned abiding by the rules of supply and demand in a free market...fair market prices follow supply and demand, predatory tactics and profit maximization instead focus on manipulating the relationship between them.

I'm no Wal-Mart basher (cause dammit they're so cheap) but you'd have to be living under a rock not to have stumbled across at least some of their unethical business practices, attack on civil rights, and blatant disregard for inconvenient law.

Very well said. You're very correct in your assessment of Wal-Mart's market power, and how they exercise it to manipulate the market.

I've had my own dealings with Wal-Mart at the corporate level, having worked on environmental impact reports for some of their development projects. Even if the findings turned out relatively benign and in their favor, they were not satisfied unless the report says that their store development and expansion projects will have nothing but positive impacts all the way around with virtually no impacts on existing businesses. Anyone with first-hand experience in communities where Wal-Mart stores have opened and who knows a thing or two about consumer spending patterns, will of course see this for the duplicitous nonsense that it is. Fortunately for their sake, more recently they've taken on a more accommodating approach that acknowledges their role in the community more realistically.

Even so, I don't shop at Wal-Mart -- I just don't like their stores.

[kexodusc]

I buy pet supplies and batteries there, maybe white sport socks...too crowded and crazy for me...

Wal-Mart will eventually fall victim to the same weakness other market giants share.
Growth becomes harder and harder - expansion from core business rarely works, instead confuses operations, and bit by bit, competitors will erode market share and margins...just ask the once dominant Sears or K-Mart corps.

[superpanavision70mm]

Where is your references for claiming proving and discrediting counterpunch.org?

[audio amateur]

njspeer, stop being stupid.

[njspeer]

Where is your references for claiming proving and discrediting counterpunch.org?

SuperPanvision, I would like to start by answering your question with a question. Would you believe everything you read on an Al Qaeda web site? Ok. Good, me neither. Now here comes the good part. "Where is your references for claiming proving and discrediting all Al Qaeda web sites?" Yeah. See how stupid that question is. Don't ever ask someone to prove that a blog is not an acceptable source.

Furthermore, I'm flabbergasted that you would suggest that it's somehow my responsibility to prove that a left-wing blog is not a credible source. Let's try to put this whole thing in context, and while we're doing it, lets try to use only common sense, and see if we can figure out what wrong with the scenario. First Nightflier makes the outragouse claim that Wal-Mart owns 10,000 factories in various countries and over 3,000 in China alone. If you had any common sense at all you would know immediately that this cannot possibly be true, but I digress. Then, I accuse Nightflier of using M. Moore's website as his source of information, and Nightflier responds by claiming his source is the LA Times, not some liberal website. Not believing that the LA Times would publish such nonsense, I call his bluff, and, low and behold, it turns out his source was not the LA Times but a liberal rag that's to the left of Moore himself. Can you see how this doesn't look good for Nightflier? Did you ever stop and ask yourself why Nightflier lied about his source?

In general, when referencing sources, the rule is: ALL websites, until proven otherwise, are to be considered disreputable. Any website (or publication in general) with a clear bias is not to be used as a reference. Period. And when citing references, always try to use original sources, and when it's not possible, try and use the most reputable source available. In particular, the use of the word 'scrooges' in Nightlier's original quote should (had you used common sense) been a really big red flag.

But you wanted me to provide references, so let me see what I can do. Five seconds worth of googling produces the Wikipedia entry for said website which details and references harsh criticisms from both the left (The New Republic) and the right (Wall Street J), and here's the link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CounterPunch_(newsletter). You're welcome.

Hopefully we can agree that when both the left and the right are complaining about your left-wind bias, you're probably not the best source of information on the web.

Also, instead of asking me to "prove" their deficient reputation, you could have simply gone to the website and read a couple articles for yourself. Below is the article I mentioned earlier. It's a piece entitled "What Michael Moore Left OUt of F9/11." In this piece the author criticizes Michael Moore for not going far enough in F911. Still think Counter Punch is a good reference?

http://www.counterpunch.org/bardacke07292004.html

[GMichael]

SuperPanvision, I would like to start by answering your question with a question. Would you believe everything you read on an Al Qaeda web site? Ok. Good, me neither. Now here comes the good part. "Where is your references for claiming proving and discrediting all Al Qaeda web sites?" Yeah. See how stupid that question is. Don't ever ask someone to prove that a blog is not an acceptable source.

Furthermore, I'm flabbergasted that you would suggest that it's somehow my responsibility to prove that a left-wing blog is not a credible source. Let's try to put this whole thing in context, and while we're doing it, lets try to use only common sense, and see if we can figure out what wrong with the scenario. First Nightflier makes the outragouse claim that Wal-Mart owns 10,000 factories in various countries and over 3,000 in China alone. If you had any common sense at all you would know immediately that this cannot possibly be true, but I digress. Then, I accuse Nightflier of using M. Moore's website as his source of information, and Nightflier responds by claiming his source is the LA Times, not some liberal website. Not believing that the LA Times would publish such nonsense, I call his bluff, and, low and behold, it turns out his source was not the LA Times but a liberal rag that's to the left of Moore himself. Can you see how this doesn't look good for Nightflier? Did you ever stop and ask yourself why Nightflier lied about his source?

In general, when referencing sources, the rule is: ALL websites, until proven otherwise, are to be considered disreputable. Any website (or publication in general) with a clear bias is not to be used as a reference. Period. And when citing references, always try to use original sources, and when it's not possible, try and use the most reputable source available. In particular, the use of the word 'scrooges' in Nightlier's original quote should (had you used common sense) been a really big red flag.

But you wanted me to provide references, so let me see what I can do. Five seconds worth of googling produces the Wikipedia entry for said website which details and references harsh criticisms from both the left (The New Republic) and the right (Wall Street J), and here's the link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CounterPunch_(newsletter). You're welcome.

Hopefully we can agree that when both the left and the right are complaining about your left-wind bias, you're probably not the best source of information on the web.

Also, instead of asking me to "prove" their deficient reputation, you could have simply gone to the website and read a couple articles for yourself. Below is the article I mentioned earlier. It's a piece entitled "What Michael Moore Left OUt of F9/11." In this piece the author criticizes Michael Moore for not going far enough in F911. Still think Counter Punch is a good reference?

http://www.counterpunch.org/bardacke07292004.html

I rest my case. This is by far the best impersonation of Lexie that I have seen.
But try to throw in a few more CAPS next time.

[Resident Loser]

...did someone mention speakers?

...man, I've seen some obscure, tangental deviations from the topic, but this one is a pip!

jimHJJ(...good knight Gladys...)