Subject:
|
Re: Rights to free goods? (was Re: What happened?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Thu, 8 Jul 1999 02:02:06 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
950 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> 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.
See my reply to Weeks.
> > 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?
Again read my reply to Weeks.
>
> > Construction workers - most of whom work 6-8 months a year, but are on
> > unemployment during the winter - and some even receive food stamps.
>
> 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.
Construction workers are employed by construction companies. Those companies
have winter layoffs. Those employees, having worked 6 months or more, are
entitled to unemployment. It works the same for auto workers. They get layed
off and collect unemployment.
If you are saying that they shouldn't be eligble for unemployment, then why do
they pay unemployment insurance.
> > 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.
They are not receiving free goods. Did they pay taxes towards those goods -
yes. So they have paid for those goods. Anyone who pays taxes can become
elible for food stamps during unemployment if their unemployment check does not
meet a certain set level.
I
> > 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?
Yes I believe in property rights - everyone on the planet has a right to
posessions. Everyone has a right to personal posessions. Society created
those that cannot obtain their own posessions. Society has an obligation to
right that wrong.
And who has to pay for it - everyone. Prepare to be looted.
The difference is, Lar, that your definition of property is "posessions". My
definition of property is "the right of ownership". Until everyone on the
planet has the ability to obtain their own posessions, IMO, noone has a right
of ownership.
|
|
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
|
|
|
|
