Of the three who do you pick and why.

W.S.Burroughs:
I think beats the other two in artistic expression and colourfulness. His works are, on my opinion most "visual"(easy to visualize), and what he did to the language can easy stand next to Joyce.

Oh, hell -- they're all pretty great; it's tough to rate one over another. All told, I think I'd be most intrigued by/want to meet someone I saw reading Carver. Especially if that reader was a girl. ["Your mom reads Bukowski!" Ha Ha.]

Carver had the best titles [though "Screams from the Balcony" is pretty great, too . . . ]

I actually like some Bukowski, but this is hilarious:
http://lainnuendo.com/articles/article2.htm

That's a pretty creepy magazine, stuff like that makes me want to live in a maximum security leaden bunker deep in the woods of someplace nobody knows about, and just think in a short time comedians who are tired of, and expouse the cliche'dsquared bullshit all around them will be able to see through your walls.

Bukowski. Definitely.
http://www.knobox.no-ip.info/~riku/fun/bio.php

Uh oh. Looks like someone's Sacred Cow got tipped over.

No, I don't even really like Bukowski that much, he's somewhat entertaining, kind of a Hemmingway knockoff(although quite a good bit better than the Daddy Of All Hack Ass Burroughing, probably a better sense of humor than Carver but less skill and sensitivity) . Maybe you should of said "Uh oh, don't really know what someone's talking about." I was really just talking about mediagnurd social commentary.

Oh, wait a second. I just noticed that Buk. post. Maybe you weren't talking to me Christopher. Damn, if not I'm all cruunch.
p.s. I don't hate Burroughs or anything he just wasn't that bright. In The Bunker was a pretty good read though, I think I read the whole thing.