 | | Re: Libitarian guff (Was: Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]) —Frank Filz
|
| | | Richard Franks wrote in message ... (...) library, (...) were (...) set (...) that (...) not (...) I don't think so. My feeling is that the reason we have so much crime is that there are so many people who have little or nothing to lose, so the (...) (24 years ago, 8-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: Libitarian guff (Was: Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]) —Richard Franks
|
| | | | (...) So you would agree that education and poverty are areas which could do a lot more than they do now if they were more efficient with the money they recieve? Reorganise away, but remember that the Market isn't neccessarily the best optimiser, (...) (24 years ago, 8-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Libitarian guff (Was: Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]) —Matthew Miller
|
| | | | (...) Sounds that way to me. It's Better than a one-vote-per-person system, because this way those who are wealthy (and therefore more qualified to decide what is good for society) get more say. Bill Gates [1] obviously shoud have 25 million times (...) (24 years ago, 8-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Libitarian guff (Was: Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]) —Jasper Janssen
|
| | | | (...) Only inasfar as Bill Gates is a nazi. And despite my intense dislike for the man, who definitely shouldn't have 25 million times more say than anyone else, I doubt he is _that_. Jasper (24 years ago, 8-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
