Home | Community | Message Board

Original Seeds Store
This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.


Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Shop: North Spore Cultivation Supplies   Bridgetown Botanicals CBD Concentrates   Myyco.com Golden Teacher Liquid Culture For Sale   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   Original Sensible Seeds Bulk Cannabis Seeds   Kraken Kratom Red Vein Kratom   MagicBag.co All-In-One Bags That Don't Suck   PhytoExtractum Buy Bali Kratom Powder

Jump to first unread post Pages: < Back | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | Next >  [ show all ]
Offlinehongomon
old hand
Registered: 04/14/02
Posts: 910
Loc: comin' at ya
Last seen: 19 years, 10 months
Re: Interesting thought.... [Re: Lallafa]
    #886145 - 09/16/02 03:46 PM (21 years, 6 months ago)

Lallafa, I completely agree. It has been, and still is, the American Inquisition. A big game of monopoly that the world has to play.

Pinky, when you defend a person's right to have his millions that he "earned through honest means," it's this kind of activity that you aren't considering. You and I might come a lot closer to agreeing that a person is entitled to what he earns HONESTLY if only we could agree on what is truly honest.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleSenor_Doobie
Snake Pit Champion
 User Gallery

Registered: 08/11/99
Posts: 22,678
Loc: Trump Train
Re: Interesting thought.... [Re: hongomon]
    #886163 - 09/16/02 03:52 PM (21 years, 6 months ago)

Yeah right?

He acts like the rich are actually morally people.

I don't think it is possible to be that rich and moral. Could be wrong but I'm willing to bet it isn't the standard.

Look how many people Gates stabbed in the back on his rise.


--------------------
"America: Fuck yeah!" -- Alexthegreat

“Nothing can now be believed which is seen in a newspaper. Truth itself becomes suspicious by being put into that polluted vehicle. The real extent of this state of misinformation is known only to those who are in situations to confront facts within their knowledge with the lies of the day.”  -- Thomas Jefferson

The greatest sin of mankind is ignorance.

The press takes [Trump] literally, but not seriously; his supporters take him seriously, but not literally. --Salena Zeto (9/23/16)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflinePhred
Fred's son
Male

Registered: 10/18/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 9 years, 2 months
Re: Interesting thought.... [Re: Senor_Doobie]
    #886374 - 09/16/02 05:21 PM (21 years, 6 months ago)

Senor Doobie writes:

Primarily mark, I'd like to comment on how much I'm enjoying this debate.

Gracias, senor. Yo tambien.

I am extremely uncomfortable with the word "allowed" as used in this context.

I admit is not the PERFECT definition. That's the problem with dictionary definitions -- they favor concision over completeness. This is particularly true when it comes to philosophical concepts. After all, if human "rights" could be explained satisfactorily in a phrase of half a dozen words or so, why the necessity for the literally thousands of treatises on the subject? Still, I object even more strongly to defining "rights" as "SOMETHING which is DUE to a person".

We are taught that people are born with rights. They are a gift from God, or from nature. I like the word "due" much better than "allowed" because "allowed" implies that rights are merely tolerated, and are not inalienable.

A better word than either would be "recognized". I use the word "allowed" in the context of "permitted", or "not punished for exercising". etc. The reason I dislike "due" is that it implies it is something which must be GIVEN to an individual, when in fact the person has those rights by his nature. As you correctly note, rights are an inherent ATTRIBUTE of an individual, as is free will. In any case, the point is that "rights" refer to action, specifically FREEDOM of action, not to things.

In steps the federal government, and they say 'No, no, no. His right to vote is inalienable, and it will be made available to him HERE and everywhere in the United States. And so he was granted what was due to him.

Not exactly. He was not "granted" anything. What has occurred is that the federal government has prevented others from violating rights HE HAD ALL ALONG.

There is a jump there. Because all people have certain inalienable rights, does NOT mean that all are to be treated equally. Only when it is an issue of our basic rights, is that the case.

You've lost me here. Your second sentence seems to be a direct contradiction of the first. Is not your most BASIC right the freedom to act as you see best (always presuming your actions do not interfere with the right of others to act as THEY see best, of course)? For example, in my opinion it is best for me to put in enough hours each day to gather enough food for myself and my family, then use the rest of the hours of my waking time learning how to make a bow and arrow and how to plant crops so I can gather more food in less time.

If it is possible for the person who needs the food to produce it himself, he should.

Agreed.

If not, then he should be provided for by those who can.

Only if he can PERSUADE others to provide for him. His inability to provide for himself does not give him the right to initiate force against others. The ONLY time physical force is justified is in a RETALIATORY context. If someone initiates force against you, or threatens to do so (i.e. says "pay me $100 a week or I'll burn down your business), you have the right to react with force. But you don't have the right to INITIATE force, not even to obtain your daily bread.

The equal treatment is that everybody eats.

This is NOT "equal treatment". The treatment of those who make it possible for him to survive is unequal to the treatment he receives. They are subjected to force. He does no work (perhaps through no fault of his own, perhaps not) while others are forced to do EXTRA work. It is true that in the case of an incapacitated individual, it is not his fault that he cannot survive without the assistance of others. But it is no less true that it is not the fault of others that he is incapacitated.

Again, you are confusing RESULTS (everyone gets fed) with ACTIONS (some people are forced to act against their best interests).

...but it is also true that the government often pays farmers not to grow food to their full potential, to keep growing food profitable. That is sad as fuck. Wouldn't it be better if the government bought the surplus, and shipped it to the starving people of the world?

Actually, I don't know if this is still the case in 2002, but certainly the US government did this (buying up surplus and giving it away as foreign aid) on a regular basis for decades. This policy killed two birds with one stone -- kept the price of food artificially high, thus protecting marginal farmers from bankruptcy, and helped fulfill foreign aid quotas. In fact, a convincing case can be made that giving food is better than giving money. A starving refugee can't eat US greenbacks. More importantly, a dictator can more easily seize and stash money than he can seize thousands of tons of grain, convert it to money before it rots, and stash the money.

To quote the Fabulous Furry Freak Brothers, "Dope will get you through times of no money better than money will get you through times of no dope." The same is true of food in a famine zone.

The argument right now seems to boil down to "what is a right?" I can't argue with you further because we have different viewpoints to this.

Believe it or not, I once held an almost identical viewpoint. It is a far from uncommon one these days. I blame my earlier stance on the appalling bias of the Canadian educational system. At the time I was going to school, Viet Nam was on TV every night, the Women's Lib movement was in full flower, the ecological movement was gaining momentum. Black Power was big, unions were at their peak, Che Guavera posters were as common in dorm rooms as books by Herman Hesse. A lot of my teachers were young, and those who weren't quite so young certainly TRIED hard to "be relevant".

The other thing to remember is this was in CANADA. It is difficult for Americans, even Americans who grew up in today's quasi-Socialist America, to realize just exactly how much MORE of a welfare state Canada is compared to the US. You think the government pokes its nose into every aspect of your life in the US of A? Man, you ain't seen NUTHIN' till you've lived a few years in the Great White North.

Sorry, I digress. The step-by-step history of my philosophical development is both boring and irrelevant. I just wanted to emphasize that I didn't come by my present beliefs casually. A lot of work and study went into it, and it's not complete yet. This is one reason I hang out here. Every now and then a really great post pops up that adds to my body of knowledge, and yes, even sometimes causes my to modify a previously-held belief.

I posted a pretty good explanation defending the metaphysical nature of human rights, validating them from first principles, in a previous thread. I'd prefer not to type it all in again from scratch if I can avoid it. Let me dig around in the archives for a bit and see if I can come up with a link. Hopefully my crummy third-world ISP will stop kicking me out every 3 or 4 minutes.

pinky


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflinePhred
Fred's son
Male

Registered: 10/18/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 9 years, 2 months
Re: Interesting thought.... [Re: Lallafa]
    #886499 - 09/16/02 05:55 PM (21 years, 6 months ago)

Lallafa writes:

a bit long, but all true

Much of it is true, much of it is misrepresented, some of it is downright false. The section on the Dominican Republic, for one, is absolute bullshit.

I'm having an extremely difficult time with my internet connection tonight, but that is usually a temporary thing, so I hope to be able to post the REAL story of the US involvement shortly.

Unfortunately, I cannot provide links to the books I have read (some of which are in Spanish, of course), or the conversations I've had with Dominicans over the last fifteen years, but I once came across a detailed yet concise UNBIASED report from a source with no axe to grind in a google search. As a matter of fact, from some of the subtle phrasing of the wording of the history, I think it safe to say the author is less than enamored with US foreign policy. However, he at least had the honesty to report what actually happened. It fits precisely with what Dominicans have told me and what I have read on my own.

its funny how you see pinky go on about how fair our market is, but never hear him talk about any negative effects.

It's funny you don't remember our conversations in earlier posts in the thread "The United States is NOT Capitalist". I am no fan of the US government's meddling in the economy, as my posts in that thread make abundantly clear. How in the world can you accuse ME, possibly the most vocal advocate of REAL capitalism on this forum, of defending the quasi-fascist mishmash of rules and restrictions and subsidies and tariffs that choke the market, all promulgated by that bunch of chuckleheads in Washington?

I believe in criticizing the US for it's REAL faults, not for exaggerated or misrepresented or speculated or even outright FALSE incidents. There's plenty to criticize without making stuff up.

Either you have never actually read my posts or you believe that you can put one over on people who haven't.

Show some honesty, dude.

pinky


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflinePhred
Fred's son
Male

Registered: 10/18/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 9 years, 2 months
Re: Interesting thought.... [Re: hongomon]
    #886518 - 09/16/02 06:01 PM (21 years, 6 months ago)

hongomon writes:

Pinky, when you defend a person's right to have his millions that he "earned through honest means," it's this kind of activity that you aren't considering.

That's a bold (and erroneous) assumption to make. I do consider this kind of activity, I am opposed to this kind of activity, and I don't believe a businessman who made his fortune through political pull has really earned his money honestly. Feel free to point to a SINGLE post of mind where I have defended government manipulation of the economy. Any one will do.

You and I might come a lot closer to agreeing that a person is entitled to what he earns HONESTLY if only we could agree on what is truly honest.

I can name dozens of wealthy people who came by their fortunes honestly. Can you name one?

pinky



--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleXlea321
Stranger
Registered: 02/25/01
Posts: 9,134
Re: Interesting thought.... [Re: Phred]
    #886653 - 09/16/02 06:56 PM (21 years, 6 months ago)

Well, Alex, why don't you name a few savage African dictators installed by America for those of us who don't understand how the real world works.

Because you arn't going to learn anything that way. You have to educate yourself otherwise you learn nothing by me spoon feeding you.

As money, no, they often don't. They do, however, get the benefit of whatever project the loan funded

You are living in a dream world. Check out what benefit the orgoni people got from Shell oil in Nigeria.


--------------------
Don't worry, B. Caapi

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleXlea321
Stranger
Registered: 02/25/01
Posts: 9,134
Re: Interesting thought.... [Re: Lallafa]
    #886656 - 09/16/02 06:58 PM (21 years, 6 months ago)

The Congo/Zaire, 1960-65:

In June 1960, Patrice Lumumba became the Congo's first prime minister after independence from Belgium. But Belgium retained its vast mineral wealth in Katanga province, prominent Eisenhower administration officials had financial ties to the same wealth, and Lumumba, at Independence Day ceremonies before a host of foreign dignitaries, called for the nation's economic as well as its political liberation, and recounted a list of injustices against the natives by the white owners of the country. The man was obviously a "Communist." The poor man was obviously doomed.
Eleven days later, Katanga province seceded, in September, Lumumba was dismissed by the president at the instigation of the United States, and in January 1961 he was assassinated at the express request of Dwight Eisenhower. There followed several years of civil conflict and chaos and the rise to power of Mobutu Sese Seko, a man not a stranger to the CIA. Mobutu went on to rule the country for more than 30 years, with a level of corruption and cruelty that shocked even his CIA handlers. The Zairian people lived in abject poverty despite the plentiful natural wealth, while Mobutu became a multibillionaire.

Good post Lallafa, but i think it's wasted on luvdem.


--------------------
Don't worry, B. Caapi

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleXlea321
Stranger
Registered: 02/25/01
Posts: 9,134
Re: Interesting thought.... [Re: Phred]
    #886665 - 09/16/02 07:01 PM (21 years, 6 months ago)

Much of it is true, much of it is misrepresented, some of it is downright false. The section on the Dominican Republic, for one, is absolute bullshit.

Source? Are you really this moronic? Don't keep asking for sources and then conveniently forgetting to post them yourself.


--------------------
Don't worry, B. Caapi

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisibleluvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?
 User Gallery


Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 34,247
Loc: Lost In Space
Re: Interesting thought.... [Re: Xlea321]
    #886951 - 09/16/02 11:05 PM (21 years, 6 months ago)

In reply to:

Good post Lallafa, but i think it's wasted on luvdem.





You truly are a moron. I made one reply in this post where I said it would be nice to see a graph made from that list.
So how I found my way into your reply puzzles me. Frankly I've found this post quite interesting watching you "lefties" defending the indefensible. Still, interesting.

And Lallafa, is a 40 year old example the best you can do?


--------------------
You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleSenor_Doobie
Snake Pit Champion
 User Gallery

Registered: 08/11/99
Posts: 22,678
Loc: Trump Train
Re: Interesting thought.... [Re: luvdemshrooms]
    #887337 - 09/17/02 04:37 AM (21 years, 6 months ago)

Alex,

Pinky said he'd be back to post more on the subject. Try reading his post instead of combing it for hypocrisy.

Pinky,

I think you might have missed my question about your Dominican neighbors (I think I may have called them Salvadorians), but regardless, I was curious as to whether those Dominicans who work in US-owned factories make enough money to feed themselves and their families.


--------------------
"America: Fuck yeah!" -- Alexthegreat

“Nothing can now be believed which is seen in a newspaper. Truth itself becomes suspicious by being put into that polluted vehicle. The real extent of this state of misinformation is known only to those who are in situations to confront facts within their knowledge with the lies of the day.”  -- Thomas Jefferson

The greatest sin of mankind is ignorance.

The press takes [Trump] literally, but not seriously; his supporters take him seriously, but not literally. --Salena Zeto (9/23/16)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleXlea321
Stranger
Registered: 02/25/01
Posts: 9,134
Re: Interesting thought.... [Re: luvdemshrooms]
    #887436 - 09/17/02 05:31 AM (21 years, 6 months ago)

So how I found my way into your reply puzzles me.

I am not surprised. No doubt a good deal of things puzzle you. Tying your shoelaces for example.

You asked for an example of the US installing dictators. Lallafa provided you with one. You then reject this and say "It's 40 years old". (Actually Mobutu was in power until recently) This is sadly typical of your responses. Cry out for "sources" until someone provides it when you reject it with utter nonsense or run away in fear.


--------------------
Don't worry, B. Caapi

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleLallafa
p_g monocle
 User Gallery

Registered: 04/13/01
Posts: 2,598
Loc: underbelly
Re: Interesting thought.... [Re: Phred]
    #887519 - 09/17/02 06:11 AM (21 years, 6 months ago)

my apologies for an unfair accusation.

however, i am prepared to debate further, the (insane) notion that most US intervention in foreign countries has somehow benefited the majority of the native population, or been an overall positive and moral force


--------------------
my tax dollars going to more hits of acid for charles manson

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisibleluvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?
 User Gallery


Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 34,247
Loc: Lost In Space
Re: Interesting thought.... [Re: Xlea321]
    #888039 - 09/17/02 09:38 AM (21 years, 6 months ago)

Actually Shit For Brains... this is another example of your poor comprehension skills. I didn't ask that question. I believe it was pinky.

But that's OK. It's just another example of what an idiot you are.


--------------------
You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineMortMtroN
journeyman
Registered: 09/09/02
Posts: 62
Last seen: 21 years, 5 months
Re: Interesting thought.... [Re: bruisedBlue]
    #888446 - 09/17/02 12:02 PM (21 years, 6 months ago)

"Define need. There are no NEEDS. There is only a need once a goal has been defined. For example, I have decided (or my instinct has for me) that I desire to live. Therefore I must nourish my body to stay alive. However, I do not NEED to live."

Everybody wants to live, and they have the right. So is starving people justifiable because they don't need to live, they only want to. How dare them want so much.

"Say someone lives in a carboard box. And someone else lives in a castle. Does the man in the cardboard box NEED to live in a castle?"

He has the right to the means to obtain decent food, clothing, and shelter. So unless he lives in a box by choice then he should be able to live somewhere else. So does the man living in the castle need to live there? Does he have extra rooms that he isn't using? maybe for a guy that has to sleep in a cardboard box.

"You own a computer. Do you need it?"

No I don't, This is a shared computer. I do use it though, which means I have some say over what happens to it. Since I use it, that makes it mine for all practical purposes. I did have an extra computer that I gave away because I didn't use it. That meant I didn't need it. So I forfieted my ownership of it to somebody who would make better use of it.

"You probably sleep in a bed. Do you need it?"

I use it, so yes. I also have a couch, which I use, but not all the time. So Sometimes I let somebody sleep there if they need to, since I am not using it, I don't need it.

"You probably eat and drink food beyond what you require to stay alive. Do you need it?"

Yes sometimes I do, but I have had extra food from my garden, that since I wasn't using, I gave it away. JUst a few days ago I gave away tomatoes that I wasn't using, therefore I didn't need them.

"could grow your own farm and gorge yourself on corn and potatoes 24 hours a day. How would that be hurting anyone else. "

It is if other people need that land to grow food that they need. While I am eating my produce like a glutton. Land is a valuable resource, and there is only so much of it. Much of the exploitation that happens to third world countries occurs because land becomes privatized and the people end up being coerced into working for the corporation that privatized it. Force isn't the only way that peoples rights are taken away. There is also coersion.

"What about the fact that he is providing employment to many people which generates wealth for those employees which in turn stimulates the economy."

It doesn't stimulate the economy if the workers are underpaid. Trickle down economics don't work. People working for a corporation usually do so because the means of production are privatized, so in order to produce goods in order to trade his labor for the things he needs he has to work for a corporation. That means that the corporation, who owns the means of production, gets all the say over what is a fair price for a workers labor. The laborer has no negotiation. This is why unions are formed, to demand a fair price for labor

"Don't you understand the concept of entrepeneurialism? "

Yes I do and it is entrepeneuralism that causes the worker to have little option to work somewhere else, because he could go to another factory, but the pay would be reletively the same.

"Believe it or not, wealth does not magically appear in the bank accounts of the rich and famous."

No, it isn't, they have to hire workers to make goods so that they can make money. Because they had enough initial investment capital to purchase a factory, they now own the means of production, and therefore they keep most of the profits. But shouldn't the workers in the factory be considered shareholders of the company, entitled to an equal portion, since the owner of the factory is getting tax breaks to run his business. That is the public pays the cost of production, through taxes and labor, yet the profits are privatized.

"Some people don't live in houses. Some live in tents and dumpsters. Some by choice, some because of circumstances in their life which have led them to poverty."

A good example of this would be a person that gets laid off from his job because they are moving the factory to Mexico to get cheaper labor. The person then cannot find another job and cannot afford to pay the rent and gets evicted by the guy that owns HIS home.

" Nearly all the wealth in this country is initially GENERATED BY THE WEALTHY."

It is generated by the people that work for the wealthy.

Edited by MortMtroN (09/17/02 05:17 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineMortMtroN
journeyman
Registered: 09/09/02
Posts: 62
Last seen: 21 years, 5 months
Re: Interesting thought.... [Re: Phred]
    #888521 - 09/17/02 12:24 PM (21 years, 6 months ago)

"That's why I ASKED for clarification. You neglected to tell us what you think an individual's "needs" are. My question is, at what point do savings (wealth) stop being sufficient to merely provide "needs" and become "excess?" Is it when your bank account is greater than is required to meet your needs for 24 hours? For a month? For a year? For a decade? What is the determining factor?"

As I probably clarified in my last post to BlueBruiser, an individual needs what he uses to produce, his tools, his food, clothing, shelter, and his transportation. I don't own anything that I don't use that I am not prepared to give away to somebody else who needs it (would use it).

"He doesn't own homes, he owns buildings. He can sell them, rent them out, let them sit empty, or tear them down. "

If somebody lives there, how is it not a home?

"Where did he get the buildings? Did he steal them? If so he is a criminal and must face the full penalty of the law. But if he built them or bought them, then they are HIS and he can do with them what he wants."

If he is not using them for any other purpose than making money, then he doesn't rightfully own it. I don't give a damn about the law, landlordship is an unethical means of making a living or two.

"A tenant does not OWN the apartment he rents, anymore than he OWNS the car he rents."

He owns the apartment more rightfully than the landlord does. If he uses it and the landlord doesn't, then the tenant is the rightful owner.

"You only need one car, so why own more? What is the point of starting a car rental company?"

I can think of circumstances to own more than one vehicle such as having a van for moving band equipment and having a car for moving people, and having a motorcycle for moving one person. But if you have two cars and one just sits parked all the time it's probably a good idea to sell it or give it away.

The point of starting a car rental company is to supply transportation to people who travel a lot. Or for temporary transportation for people getting their car fixed. A tenant very rarely just lives somewhere temporarily, it is their home.

I am a laborer, that is all there is to it. I work for whoever will hire me and I have no control over the wage I earn.


"Once again you are doing nothing more than using a different arrangement of words to denote the same CONCEPT. Please explain to us the difference between "a fixed amount of resources" and "so much resources that are available". "

here is my answer: "Resources qua resources are useless for human existence. Raw resources must be transformed into goods through productive human effort before they are of use."

and it is the laborer that does that job, and who doesn't get a fair share of the profit made from producing those resources.

"How are those who mined the ore responsible for people "doing without"? "

They aren't, they are the ones that are doing without. Mine workers were almast all underpaid until they organized and formed unions to demand their fair share.

"How are those who mined the ore responsible for people "doing without"? Or those who refined the ore into steel. Or those who turned the steel into a cooking pot. These people brought into existence something that didn't exist previously. They didn't take it from anyone else. They didn't take something from a fixed pie, thereby leaving everyone else with less, they made the pie LARGER. The money they made from trading the pots for money which they then used to buy their houses, food, and clothing, was not TAKEN from anyone. In a very real sense, it was CREATED by them."

and they were most likely being underpaid to do it, unless of course they are union workers who have demanded their rightfully fair share. So why does the big corporation get all the profit while the real workers struggle for their daily bread? The workers are being exploited which isn't too different than theft.

Edited by MortMtroN (09/17/02 05:20 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleLallafa
p_g monocle
 User Gallery

Registered: 04/13/01
Posts: 2,598
Loc: underbelly
Re: Interesting thought.... [Re: MortMtroN]
    #888550 - 09/17/02 12:31 PM (21 years, 6 months ago)

"It is generated by the people that work for the wealthy."

Exactly.


--------------------
my tax dollars going to more hits of acid for charles manson

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleLallafa
p_g monocle
 User Gallery

Registered: 04/13/01
Posts: 2,598
Loc: underbelly
Re: Interesting thought.... [Re: Phred]
    #888610 - 09/17/02 12:48 PM (21 years, 6 months ago)

"First of all, 1% of Americans do not own 50% of America's assets. For that matter, 1% of Americans don't even own 50% of all America's CURRENCY. Anyone who states this as a FACT will have to provide a RELIABLE source to back this claim. Links to some nutjob at rense.com don't count."


now read this:
http://www.korpios.org/resurgent/L-overclass.html
:frown:


--------------------
my tax dollars going to more hits of acid for charles manson

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleLallafa
p_g monocle
 User Gallery

Registered: 04/13/01
Posts: 2,598
Loc: underbelly
Re: Interesting thought.... [Re: Phred]
    #888620 - 09/17/02 12:50 PM (21 years, 6 months ago)



--------------------
my tax dollars going to more hits of acid for charles manson

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineMortMtroN
journeyman
Registered: 09/09/02
Posts: 62
Last seen: 21 years, 5 months
Re: Interesting thought.... [Re: Phred]
    #888695 - 09/17/02 01:21 PM (21 years, 6 months ago)

"In any case, the point is that "rights" refer to action, specifically FREEDOM of action, not to things."

So how does a landlord or anybody for that matter, righfully own something

Edited by MortMtroN (09/17/02 01:28 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflinePhred
Fred's son
Male

Registered: 10/18/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 9 years, 2 months
Re: Interesting thought.... [Re: MortMtroN]
    #889489 - 09/17/02 07:20 PM (21 years, 6 months ago)

MortMtroN writes:

As I probably clarified in my last post to BlueBruiser, an individual needs what he uses to produce, his tools, his food, clothing, shelter, and his transportation.

And how does he obtain tools, food, clothing, shelter, and transportation? With money. My question is, how much money does he have to have before he is considered rich? Enough to buy all the tools, food, clothing, shelter, and transportation he and his dependents will use in the next 24 hours? Or in the next 24 days? The next 24 months? The next 24 years? An approximate answer will do.

If he is not using them for any other purpose than making money, then he doesn't rightfully own it.

Does this hold true for all means of production, or only for housing? Note that a dwelling is not even a means of production.

I don't give a damn about the law, landlordship is an unethical means of making a living or two.

What is someone to do who doesn't have the skills and/or tools and materials to build their own home? Where are they to live?

He owns the apartment more rightfully than the landlord does. If he uses it and the landlord doesn't, then the tenant is the rightful owner.

But the landlord DOES use it. He uses it to make a living by renting it to tenants who need a place to live. That same landlord may also own an office building. He rents the offices space to businesses who need an office. He may also own a warehouse. He rents it to businesses who need space in which to store their products. Etc.

The point of starting a car rental company is to supply transportation to people who travel a lot. Or for temporary transportation for people getting their car fixed.

Actually, the correct answer is, "The point of starting a car rental company is to make money." Sorry to have to thrown a trick question at you.

I am a laborer, that is all there is to it. I work for whoever will hire me and I have no control over the wage I earn.

What do you do when no one is hiring? How do you keep yourself alive?

here is my answer: "Resources qua resources are useless for human existence. Raw resources must be transformed into goods through productive human effort before they are of use."
and it is the laborer that does that job, and who doesn't get a fair share of the profit made from producing those resources.


If the laborer feels he is being exploited, why doesn't he simply obtain resources on his own, and produce goods himself, and fill in the hundreds of government forms required to prove his goods meet government regulations, and buy the required licenses, and pay the required taxes, then sell and deliver the goods himself, and thereby keep 100% of the sale price of the goods?

pinky




--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: < Back | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | Next >  [ show all ]

Shop: North Spore Cultivation Supplies   Bridgetown Botanicals CBD Concentrates   Myyco.com Golden Teacher Liquid Culture For Sale   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   Original Sensible Seeds Bulk Cannabis Seeds   Kraken Kratom Red Vein Kratom   MagicBag.co All-In-One Bags That Don't Suck   PhytoExtractum Buy Bali Kratom Powder


Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* The Dominican Republic
( 1 2 3 4 all )
Baby_Hitler 5,326 62 11/10/05 12:00 PM
by psiclops
* Quake in Dominican Republic shakta 501 2 09/23/03 08:11 AM
by shakta
* Conflict of Interest the Other Way Autonomous 694 2 03/22/05 01:27 PM
by JesusChrist
* US troops to 'protect oil interests' in Africa? Edame 827 1 07/11/03 12:55 PM
by Xlea321
* Israel vs. Iraq Biased, but interesting
( 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 all )
Buddha5254 14,106 133 11/08/02 11:01 AM
by Innvertigo
* Russia says to defend post-war Iraq oil interests
( 1 2 all )
pattern 2,963 22 03/28/03 02:31 PM
by grib
* It is not in America?s interest to invade Iraq. RonoS 2,478 12 09/27/02 12:03 AM
by downforpot
* Interesting (but long) article on electronic voting. luvdemshrooms 793 0 10/15/03 03:44 PM
by luvdemshrooms

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Enlil, ballsalsa
10,579 topic views. 1 members, 11 guests and 6 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2024 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.033 seconds spending 0.008 seconds on 15 queries.