From: Platt Holden (pholden@sc.rr.com)
Date: Fri Jul 16 2004 - 13:49:22 BST
Arlo,
> Money, though, *is* a human right?
Absolutely not. But to earn money, yes. Otherwise, you're a slave.
> > Social wealth? Where did that idea come from? Does it mean that part of
> > everything you earn and own belongs to others? Are "free roads" and "free
> > college educations" human rights?
> I'd say they are Intellectual level "values". "Accumulating wealth" is a
> social level "value".
Roads and education are social values. So is accumulating wealth.
> (Probably just as much as I despise being told I have to pay for an
> idiotic, misguided and immoral war.)
Immoral war? How so from an MOQ point of view?
> I agree that welfare needs to be restructured. I do not agree that it
> should be abolished.
>
> Oddly, Platt, some welfare (not all) could be ended if neighbors would
> start taking care of their neighbors. If you could convince a lot of other
> people to think about "community", then you wouldn't have to lose your
> personal wealth and be bothered being forced to help those less fortunate
> than yourself.
Why do you suppose it's so hard to "convince a lot of others?"
> That we should not be complacent with a system that is obviously flawed.
Inequities in the system mean the system is obvious flawed? Is that a plea
for redistribution of wealth, whether deserved or not?
> So, basically, they (UC) can do whatever they want, so long as the prices of
> good in the marketplace stay cheap?
As said repeatedly, no one can do "whatever they want."
> Do you not think it would be really easy for the ex-UC employees to just
> find another job? If so, then why should it matter if UC goes under? If
> not, then what is this saying about (1) the economny and (2) the need for
> welfare.
Who said life was, or should be, "really easy?"
> You avoided the question. I'll reask.
>
> Are you against laws prohibitng "businesses" from forming monopolies?
Yes, so long as the laws don't also apply to government. What kind of a
level playing field is it when government doesn't play by the same rules?
> Also, since you blame American education shortcomings (I though we were the
> best in the world?) on it being "public", where did you find information
> demonstrating the failure of public education system in Canada, Britain,
> Germany, Denmark.
Most students irrationally despise America.
> And, to make a specific point, Japan, which we are told leads us in
> education in many, many fields, has a "public" system (less than 5% of
> Japanese schools are privately owned and run).
Japan, a regimented society with a policy of ethnic purity, has a culture
that encourages and rewards educational excellence.
> How do you place the blame on "public"? Seems more like a political agenda
> than a well-thought out criticism?
Do you not have a well-thought out political agenda?
> > I don't accept your premise that maximizing wealth necessarily "tramples"
> > anyone. That's a reflection of belief that there's only such much of the
> > pie to go around. What capitalism does is create an ever larger pie.
> >
>
> And what "modern capitalism" is doing is tossing the crusts to the majority
> of people in this country. Maybe you should come and talk to all the
> families in my hometown who are losing their jobs, causing the local
> economy to pretty much collapse, where the only "new" jobs are low-wage
> retail and local stores are going under, and explain to them how they are
> getting "more pie".
Anybody suggest to them to stop whining and move on?
> > Believe what you wish. Speak out against what you deem evil. You're free
> > to do so unless intimidated by political correctness designed to smother
> > "degenerate" views.
> >
> > Maybe we can agree that freedom of speech is the most precious freedom of
> > all, one that's worth dying for.
>
> Absolutely. Hence we are able to have this coversation. :-) (It's too early
> in the day for some Tres Pistoles, but I'll earmark a bottle for tonight!)
>
> By the way, the "left" (assuming that's who you mean) is not the only side
> demanding a "politically correct" way of speaking.
Well, at least you admit the left is guilty of something. :-)
Let's see. So far we agree that free speech is worth dying for and
government should stop subsidizing business. How about a law preventing
anyone in government from accepting money from anyone? Would you be in
favor of that?
Platt
>
> MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
> Mail Archives:
> Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
> Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
> MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
>
> To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
> http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
>
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archives:
Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Jul 16 2004 - 13:52:42 BST