Subject:
|
Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This...
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Mon, 24 Mar 2003 15:24:57 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
960 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Christopher L. Weeks writes:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Dave Schuler writes:
>
> > Would you prefer that the Federal Government taxes you, or would
> > you rather be robbed with impugnity by a crooked stockbroker who
> > didn't let you see the prospectus?
>
> While I agree with the trend of your note as a whole -- times have never been
> perfect and nostalgia is often silly, This one point seems weird.
>
> I would rather that people have the ability to trick me losing my money than
> to take it from me at gunpoint. Isn't that how everyone would answer?
I presume you're talking about the government in the latter case, but can
you rephrase that without the "at gunpoint" phrase? There's no initiation
of force involved; it's simple enforcement of social contract. You may
disagree with the contract, but until you exit from it, you are subject to it.
> And there is something to be said for the notion of going back to a simpler
> government with the knowledge that we have gained since those times and adding
> on the needed layers of complexity with purpose rather than as a series of ad
> hoc measures.
Okay, but who gets to decide which measures are necessary and which are not?
Dave!
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
Message is in Reply To:
164 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
|
|
|
|
