 | | Re: Rights to free goods? (was Re: What happened? —Ed Jones
|
| | | (...) were (...) Why, because we had the nerve to see that things were wrong and fought to right them? Or because your generation has done absolutely nothing but reap the goods for nothing. (...) In the 60s you didn't have to hire anyone. You could (...) (25 years ago, 8-Jul-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: Rights to free goods? (was Re: What happened? —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | (...) You're stretching here, you know. This notion that you paid in advance for food stamps and therefore are entitled to get them kind of runs counter to the notion that the needy deserve help whether they paid for it or not. You can't have it (...) (25 years ago, 8-Jul-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: Rights to free goods? (was Re: What happened? —Ed Jones
|
| | | | | | | (...) Actually, you can, and it was the intent of the original program - to assist those with no income and to assist those who are underemployeed. (...) [snip] (...) Well, actually, he has to pay unemployment insurance (which is part of his taxes). (...) (25 years ago, 8-Jul-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | What is insurance? (was Re: Rights to free goods? (was Re: What happened? —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | | | (...) No, you cannot have your cake and eat it too. That violates causality. No, you cannot make two opposing/conflicting arguments at the same time. That violates logic. That's what you're trying to do. So you cannot have it both ways. (...) (...) (25 years ago, 8-Jul-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Re: What is insurance? (was Re: Rights to free goods? (was Re: What happened? —Mike Stanley
|
| | | | | | | | | (...) The politicians they own cast votes on their behalf all the time - much more often than on the behalf of the people who elect them. (25 years ago, 8-Jul-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Re: What is insurance? (was Re: Rights to free goods? (was Re: What happened? —Steve Bliss
|
| | | | | | | | (...) When corporations are no longer immortal people (under the law), I'll worry about 'corporation rights'. Steve (25 years ago, 8-Jul-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: What is insurance? (was Re: Rights to free goods? (was Re: What happened? —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | | <378410DA.E6670E74@voyager.net> <slrn7o85bv.7bp.cjc@...S.UTK.EDU> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit (...) An honest politician is one who stays bought. There are almost no honest politicians. (25 years ago, 8-Jul-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | Re: Rights to free goods? (was Re: What happened? —Christopher L. Weeks
|
| | | | Hi all, First, I would like to say a few words about the sterilization thread and Thomas' claim that there was hostility here. I want to apologize. When I first brought up sterilization it was somewhat (but not totally) facetious. I included the (...) (25 years ago, 8-Jul-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Rights to free goods? (was Re: What happened? —Ed Jones
|
| | | | (...) broken. (...) Not at all, see my response to Larry on this - you claimed to lack an appropriate flippant response - so I provided it. But I must say, that the original suggestion of sterilization made my skin crawl. (...) But on to the serious (...) (25 years ago, 8-Jul-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
