 | | Re: War —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | (...) Tsk tsk yourself. I'm comfortable I've got the causes pegged correctly. (URL) (23 years ago, 4-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: War —David Eaton
|
| | | | (...) that fault != bad. Saying that the US isn't at fault is erroneous. Saying that you stand behind our actions insofar as you think things would have been *WORSE* had we acted differently or not at all is what I expect you to mean. Per your (...) (23 years ago, 4-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: War —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | (...) Nope. That cite in fact does get to the root of the assertion you make. Saying that FB Sr. has an out because he had a bad childhood is egregious bogosity. (23 years ago, 4-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: War —David Eaton
|
| | | | (...) An "out"? I never said he had an "out". An "out" implies removal of responsibility perhaps, but not of fault. Perhaps a re-reading of my two posts is in order. I feel a little like I'm entering the "Scott-and-Larry show" on this one... DaveE (23 years ago, 4-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: War —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | (...) Can you elaborate on what you mean by "fault !=bad" then? Maybe there's some fundamental misunderstanding here... However: I'll reiterate, FB Jr.s pain is FB Srs fault more than anyone else's. Reread the cite I gave... you're going down the (...) (23 years ago, 4-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: War —David Eaton
|
| | | | (...) Acha! That's the crucial bit. "More FBS's fault than the government's". I.E. not to say that the government isn't at fault-- that would be (I think it is)misleading. But more to say that it is FBS's actions which, "should" have changed-- or (...) (23 years ago, 4-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: War —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | (...) What I want to do is divorce causality from fault to a certain extent here. Factors in FB Sr.s environment may well have contributed to his being a bad person, ("caused it") but remember the scenario, we assume a just finding of homicide as a (...) (23 years ago, 5-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: War —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek writes: Oh, and further, in the general case, it is the parent that is at fault when the parent does not adequately provide for the minor child. Not external factors or causes that the parent could have (...) (23 years ago, 5-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Freedom vs. Wellfare (was: War) —Horst Lehner
|
| | | | | | (...) I agree with most of that, including that it is not just that the child suffer for the fault of the father. But I could imagine some other ways of ensuring that he doesn't, besides allowing adoption. Isn't there quite possibly a mother who (...) (23 years ago, 6-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Freedom vs. Wellfare (was: War) —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | | (...) Potentially, if that's what the mother wants to do. (...) Where does this money come from? Taxpayers, or voluntary contributions? If the former, it is *less* just to extort funds from yet more victims (the taxpayers) to allow the father to (...) (23 years ago, 6-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Freedom vs. Wellfare —Horst Lehner
|
| | | | | | Hello Larry, (...) Now, this is exactly where we differ. While you seem to always look at the situation from the imprisoned father's perspective, I see the child to be an innocent victim of the father. And if you feel as a victim just because you (...) (23 years ago, 8-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Freedom vs. Wellfare —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | | (...) I would *not* want to pay. He should pay for his own incarceration to the maximum extent possible, but when he cannot we must pay to keep him there in order to protect ourselves. (...) The child starves to death. (...) No they should not. But (...) (23 years ago, 8-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Freedom vs. Wellfare —Horst Lehner
|
| | | | | | Hello Larry, hello everybody, (...) So the goods you need to be kept alive (in a decent way, I would add) are not rights? What value does the right to live have, then, if it is OK for others to just let me starve, without any fault on my side (...) (23 years ago, 10-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Freedom vs. Wellfare —Simon Bennett
|
| | | | | | | (...) Please don't move it to email, Horst. Your contributions have been extremely well thought out and useful and you are now getting to a point that I have been looking for a reasonable way to raise to hear Larry's 'total free market' view on. (...) (23 years ago, 11-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | not sure what to call this —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | | | | Hmm... not sure if you are referring to whence resource property rights, or is it the luck factor that you are wondering about. (...) Chris has alluded to this problem in the past. Asserting labor mixin as a mechanism to getting title to previously (...) (23 years ago, 11-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | The value of environmental assets (was Re: not sure what to call this) —Simon Bennett
|
| | | | | | | | | (...) I think it's both actually: (...) Yes, this is exactly the problem. It was solved in Antarctica by dividing up among nations that were close or had 'discovered' it and this has worked mainly because they also all agreed to leave the natural (...) (23 years ago, 12-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Re: The value of environmental assets (was Re: not sure what to call this) —Steven Lane
|
| | | | | | | | | | In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Simon Bennett writes: If you had placed Aboriginal Australians in (...) Although this is wrong from a human point of view, genetically it is of course correct. The genes of the conqueror's thrive more than those of the (...) (22 years ago, 28-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | The value of environmental assets (was Re: not sure what to call this) —Simon Bennett
|
| | | | | | | | | (...) I think it's both actually: (...) Yes, this is exactly the problem. It was solved in Antarctica by dividing up among nations that were close or had 'discovered' it and this has worked mainly because they also all agreed to leave the natural (...) (23 years ago, 12-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: not sure what to call this —Horst Lehner
|
| | | | | | | | (...) I agree. (...) I agree. (...) I don't agree. Not that I have to offer a better system, but how can you prove it's impossible? (...) I agree on freedom, but then, isn't there also a price others in the world have to pay for our freedom? If so, (...) (23 years ago, 15-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Freedom vs. Wellfare —Ross Crawford
|
| | | | | | | (...) I think the issue here is the fact that the state collects taxes, and uses them as *it* sees fit. In a free market, everyone would still have the right to help the abandoned child as they see fit, without the state "forcing" them to. Where (...) (23 years ago, 11-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Re: Freedom vs. Wellfare —Horst Lehner
|
| | | | | | | | (...) This is probably the best statement I have read here on the topic ... Thanks for it, Ross, and greetings Horst (who is a bit behind in reading news ...) (23 years ago, 24-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Freedom vs. Wellfare —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | | (...) That is a correct restatement of what I said, yes. There are no rights to free goods. This is a fundamental tenet of my belief system. It is not held by all americans (witness those who feel a tithe to their church is a mandatory moral (...) (23 years ago, 11-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Freedom vs. Wellfare —Horst Lehner
|
| | | | | | (...) And you would hold that even if what they take away from you is pure luxury, whereas they need it to survive? Well, a humanistic attitude IMO goes a bit more towards enabling a decent life for everybody. It also does not contain a right to (...) (23 years ago, 24-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | Re: War —Scott Arthur
|
| | | | (...) What if passers by cut themselves on the barbs? (...) ...only if the punishment is just. Scott A (...) (23 years ago, 5-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: War —Christopher L. Weeks
|
| | | | (...) That's easy. Either the fence builder built a hazardous obstruction on land not his own, or the passer by was trespassing. (...) There's no such thing. The punisher is at fault, in my opinon (but it can only _be_ opinion...there is no right (...) (23 years ago, 5-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: War —Scott Arthur
|
| | | | (...) I agree with you to very large extent. But when one is faced with grieving relatives it is very difficult to argue against the retribution argument. On a macro scale this was what was happening in the US in the days after the 11th; a lot of (...) (23 years ago, 5-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: War —Christopher L. Weeks
|
| | | | (...) suffer. (...) only (...) if (...) still (...) Tough. I'd do it. We must be better than that. (...) I agree. I think I was nearly assaulted at work when an argument became heated and when I was called unamerican, I responded that they (the (...) (23 years ago, 5-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
