 | | Re: Rights to free goods? (was Re: What happened? —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | (...) It worked. (...) Feel free to act on that belief. There are many worthy charities out there. You mentioned one of my favorites, Habitat for Humanity. We've been supporting them for an awfully long time. (...) That's where you go too far. (...) (25 years ago, 30-Jun-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: Rights to free goods? (was Re: What happened? —Jeff Stembel
|
| | | | | (...) Admirable quality, I wish more humans felt this way. People *should* feel this way, as it is good for all. (...) Why? Because he feels the government should try to take care of the people it was created to protect and serve? I think you, (...) (25 years ago, 30-Jun-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: Rights to free goods? (was Re: What happened? —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | | | (...) OK, OK, I give in. I'll feel compassion for those people in the US that for reasons beyond their control can't afford to take care of themselves. All 2 of them. That was a flippant remark, but it makes a point. If you want my help, you have to (...) (25 years ago, 1-Jul-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: Rights to free goods? (was Re: What happened? —Mike Stanley
|
| | | | | | (...) This smacks of this new age crap I hear about how morals are relative and everyone is entitled to their own morals, no matter how warped, and nobody else should condemn them. That's bullshit. Lemme give you an example of how you determine what (...) (25 years ago, 1-Jul-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | Re: Rights to free goods? (was Re: What happened? —Simon Denscombe
|
| | | | (...) In all fairness Communism is defendable from first principles yet is always said to be bad. I agree with the ideal of communism but not Marxism. In an ideal communism state there is no tax, no unemployment. I've missed out on most of this (...) (25 years ago, 4-Jul-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Rights to free goods? (was Re: What happened? —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | (...) In all fairness Communism is INdefensible from first principles, if you accept the rights based principle that people have the right to maximum freedom, or the utilitarian principle that we should strive for the system that produces the (...) (25 years ago, 4-Jul-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Rights to free goods? (was Re: What happened? —Jasper Janssen
|
| | | | (...) There you go again, mixing theory with practice. In _theory_, someone/some committee _with all the information_ making decisions can do better (as measured by the utilitarian principle) than the free market. Much in the same way that in (...) (25 years ago, 22-Jul-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Rights to free goods? (was Re: What happened? —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | (...) No. Nice try though. (...) So you're conceding the rights based argument, then? Good. (...) No. In THEORY it's impossible for any finite committee to outperform (that is, out allocate) the market, unless they have more information than the (...) (25 years ago, 22-Jul-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Rights to free goods? (was Re: What happened? —Jasper Janssen
|
| | | | (...) Says who? The mere fact that I choose to make a post focusing on one side of the argument does not mean I concede the other. Far from it. The trouble is, we both start from opposite views of what is a right and what is not, and therefore, (...) (25 years ago, 26-Jul-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
