Subject:
|
Re: Rights to free goods? (was Re: What happened?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Thu, 8 Jul 1999 01:10:41 GMT
|
Reply-To:
|
lpieniazek@novera[StopSpammers].com
|
Viewed:
|
1076 times
|
| |
|
|
Ed Jones wrote:
> I grew up during the 60s
So did I, although you have some seniority on me, the 70's were my
decade of activism.
> remember the era that fought for equal rights,
> fought against the war in Vietnam,
Good causes. I was prepared to resist Vietnam if it had dragged on much
longer. What a useless little war. A waste of national treasure, and
human life. That war should have been over in 1963 if it had been fought
properly, but more importantly, it was one we had no business being in
in the first place. Pick your wars carefully. Then fight to win as
quickly as possible with a maximum of destructive schrecklichkeit and a
minimum loss of human life. Vietnam was not a war we should have been
in.
> fought for student rights,
No idea what that meant at the time and still don't. What rights do
students have, exactly, that every other consumer doesn't? If they don't
like the curriculum or university policy, stop going there... Anything
else smacks of the inmates running the asylum.
> fought against
> oppression of the poor by the rich, fought to get assistance to those who were
> in need.
Pretty clear on what those meant. The first sounds good but in practice
turned out to be a code phrase for something entirely different, and the
second, well, why did you have to fight? Wasn't the American Red Cross
doing their job? Perhaps the War On Poverty that the Great Society
initiated scared all the effective charities out of business?
> Construction workers - most of whom work 6-8 months a year, but are on
> unemployment during the winter - and some even receive food stamps.
I'm not advocating sterilization as a means of qualifying for
"benefits", I'm advocating that there be no benefits, and no mandatory
sterilization either.
However your arguments seem weak. This particular one strikes me as
ludicrous. Please explain to me why a construction worker, who has
chosen his profession, has the "right" to work 6-8 months and then kick
back the rest of the year? Why exactly does he qualify for unemployment
insurance? His profession is structured so he can't work during the
winter. That's his choice.
Is a teacher unemployed during the summer? Is a farmer unemployed during
the winter? I don't think so.
Construction workers need to manage their income to make it last all
year despite the fact that it comes in spurts. If they act as if their
summer weekly gross is their winter weekly gross, they have made a
decision to ignore reality and need to face the consequences.
> Why not,
> they're tax dollars have paid for the right to receive food stamps.
There IS no right to receive free goods, whether you first were looted
of some of yours or not. Our society may be structured to deliver them
but that doesn't mean you're actually entitled to your entitlements.
You've consistently dodged this point.
> I am truly appalled by the direction this debate has taken.
Me too, but for somewhat different reasons. The looters haven't tried to
justify their actions and won't stay pinned down to anything. Do you
believe in property rights or don't you?
--
Larry Pieniazek larryp@novera.com http://my.voyager.net/lar
- - - Web Application Integration! http://www.novera.com
fund Lugnet(tm): http://www.ebates.com/ Member ref: lar, 1/2 $$ to
lugnet.
NOTE: I have left CTP, effective 18 June 99, and my CTP email
will not work after then. Please switch to my Novera ID.
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
433 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
