 | | Re: A hypothetical economics question...
|
|
(...) Dave! Way to keep your eye on the moving targets! This was not a small topic you raised with your seemingly simple query. Of course, all of the things you describe are brought to us by the friendly passages contained in Title 12 of the Federal (...) (23 years ago, 28-Feb-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: A hypothetical economics question...
|
|
(...) I thought you were always off to church and such...my mistake. (...) Why not? I am trying to suggest we give those under the thumb of the world be given a clean slate. Anything they do from this moment forward can bring them whatever wealth (...) (23 years ago, 28-Feb-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: A hypothetical economics question...
|
|
(...) You are, of course, advocating communism: "Anyone who possesses even a single item beyond basic living requirements is equally culpable as one who possesses countless frivolous luxury items." And in fact I think there is a manifest difference (...) (23 years ago, 28-Feb-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: War on Drugs SUPPORTS terrorists.
|
|
(...) Excellent! Do you have any way of knowing what attention the ad attracted? Has the LP web site had a burst of hits or mail? I hope that this does raise awareness of the reality of things. Chris (23 years ago, 28-Feb-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: A hypothetical economics question...
|
|
(...) It's a nifty visual, I agree. I'm still not sold on the film for a number of other reasons, but who wouldn't love the idea of someone swooping in to negate our debts for us? Ignoring for a moment the problem of destruction of private property (...) (23 years ago, 28-Feb-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
