 | | Re: Libertarian stuff (Was: Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]) —Jasper Janssen
|
| | | (...) YM, throwing the parents into jail and throwing the kid out on the streets? I fail to see the overall improvement. Jasper (25 years ago, 11-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: Libertarian stuff (Was: Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]) —Richard Franks
|
| | | | | (...) Duh, then the house/hovel that they previously occupied can go to better, more worthy people - in Libertopia this seems to be equivalent with richer people. (1) Richard (1) And why not, as they supply the libraries, schools and workhouses ;) (25 years ago, 11-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Re: Libertarian stuff (Was: Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]) —Matthew Miller
|
| | | | (...) It might not be an improvement, but it'll certainly be an issue. 'Cause without the government telling corporations they can't, a lot of food products could very easily have a new secret ingredient. Oh, sure, people might vote with their (...) (25 years ago, 11-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Libertarian stuff (Was: Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]) —Richard Franks
|
| | | | (...) And Coka Cola would finally win the tasteaddictionMORE challenge... Richard (25 years ago, 11-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Libertarian stuff (Was: Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]) —Scott Edward Sanburn
|
| | | | | (...) Didn't the original Coca-Cola have cocaine in it, for that extra midday boost (1), when it first came out? 1) Original advertisement, which I saw, many moons ago! Scott S. ___...___ Scott E. Sanburn-> ssanburn@cleanweb.net Systems (...) (25 years ago, 11-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: Libertarian stuff (Was: Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]) —Matthew Miller
|
| | | | | | | (...) Yes, that's true. Cocaine was originally not realized to be harmful and thought of as medicinal. When it became apparent that there might be some health concerns, Coca-Cola removed it from their product. But this isn't necessarily a promise (...) (25 years ago, 11-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Re: Libertarian stuff (Was: Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]) —Jasper Janssen
|
| | | | | | | | (...) Actually, they removed it from their product when there was a law passed against cocaine. Or so I'd heard. (...) Nor do they even seem willing to admit that nicotine is addictive. I mean, for crying out loud: "I, personally, do not believe (...) (25 years ago, 12-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: Libertarian stuff (Was: Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]) —Lindsay Frederick Braun
|
| | | | | | | (...) With none of those embarassing white powder marks around the nostrils. ;) (This is similar to the selling point of chewing tobacco, no smoke stains or smells.) (...) Where did you find one of *those*? I've never seen one, except as a plate in (...) (25 years ago, 11-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: Libertarian stuff (Was: Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]) —Scott Edward Sanburn
|
| | | | | | (...) I think it was in one of my classes, showing the history of drug laws. Sociology, perhaps? Scott S. ___...___ Scott E. Sanburn-> ssanburn@cleanweb.net Systems Administrator/CAD Operator-Affiliated Engineers -> (URL) Page -> (URL) Page -> (URL) (25 years ago, 11-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Libertarian stuff (Was: Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]) —Jasper Janssen
|
| | | | (...) "Now back to the _old_ old formula!" Jasper (25 years ago, 12-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
