On Aug 30, 9:52*am, dave wrote:

[...]



The name doesn't define the government. Socialist is a vague term. I'm a
libertarian socialist and we don't like any kind of government.


But without a government, who are you socialists gonna get to steal
money from those hated and despised people who earned it and give it
to those who didn't?

Fags, Fags, and more Fags
http://www.libertypost.org/cgi-bin/r...?ArtNum=294593

Ahh sho am GLAD Ahh live in backwater hick territory.[Come back here
with that watermelon,boy!]

Lets me gits bak tu paintin mah windows (window frames/wood trim boards)
sew dey kin Glow in the dark.
cuhulin

On Mon, 30 Aug 2010 12:11:01 -0700, DEFCON 88 wrote:

On Aug 30, 9:52Â*am, dave wrote:

[...]



The name doesn't define the government. Socialist is a vague term. I'm
a libertarian socialist and we don't like any kind of government.


But without a government, who are you socialists gonna get to steal
money from those hated and despised people who earned it and give it to
those who didn't?


With the exception of celebrities, most income in excess of half a
million is UNEARNED. It is excessive "producer surplus" or it is
economic rent. These funds are essentially stolen from the common people
and pocketed by the rich. All wealth is earned or naturally occurring.
But all too often the collectors of the wealth are not the producers of
the wealth. And the redistribution of this stolen prosperity is the
primary job of governments.

--
"Senate rules don't trump the Constitution" -- http://GreaterVoice.org/60

Michael Coburn wrote:
On Mon, 30 Aug 2010 12:11:01 -0700, DEFCON 88 wrote:

On Aug 30, 9:52 am, dave wrote:

[...]



The name doesn't define the government. Socialist is a vague term. I'm
a libertarian socialist and we don't like any kind of government.


But without a government, who are you socialists gonna get to steal
money from those hated and despised people who earned it and give it to
those who didn't?


With the exception of celebrities, most income in excess of half a
million is UNEARNED. It is excessive "producer surplus" or it is
economic rent. These funds are essentially stolen from the common people
and pocketed by the rich. All wealth is earned or naturally occurring.
But all too often the collectors of the wealth are not the producers of
the wealth. And the redistribution of this stolen prosperity is the
primary job of governments.



Totally preposterous.

A man works his entire life so he can become a producer of, say,
superb audio electronics, as a friend of mine did -- and he does so,
is successful in producing his useful items and earns a few million,
risking much and hiring many people in the process, from engineers
to designers to floor sweepers.

What appalling and frightening hubris -- to declare that some
elected criminal or appointed "authority" can take his life's work
away from him.

It is often the super-rich (in the multibillionaire class) who are
behind the kind of false-flag theft schemes that you advocate. They
don't want any bright upstart new millionaire-class competitors.
Ever. So they love it when the new fellows are taxed or regulated
out of existence -- taxes and regulations which the super-rich can
evade through carefully-crafted loopholes or other tricks; and
regulations they can afford, though the new upstarts can't.

We need bright, creative people to keep as much of the wealth they
earn as possible. Because 1) that's justice, and 2) for our own
selfish reasons -- because bright, creative people will do bright,
creative things with that wealth, and that benefits us all.

Stealing it (the "primary job of government" according to you) and
giving it to deadly dull bureaucrats and the spawn of the least
intelligent among us will only end up increasing spinning hubcap
sales, and Wal-Mart's and McDonald's bottom line. What a waste.

Furthermore, income "redistribution," though it devastates the lives
of so many families and impoverishes our civilization, gives no
lasting benefit to the people it's supposed to help.

If this Halloween you took _all_ the wealth of the nation and
divided it _precisely equally_ among all the featherless bipeds in
America, by New Year's eve there would be millionaires and poor
people by the multiple millions. So the whole exercise is pointless
even if you accept its tyrannical and unconstitutional central premise.

Of course, there are fraudsters who steal other people's wealth
(besides bureaucrats and congressmen, I mean).

The most egregious among them are the bankers, and I don't mean just
the Fed. I mean the entire commercial banking system, which makes
"loans" on demand deposits -- which is essentially creating money
out of thin air, on which "created" money they have a license to
collect interest. That _is_ theft, and shouldn't be allowed.


With all good wishes,



Kevin Alfred Strom.
--
http://kevinalfredstrom.com/

On Sep 1, 5:14*am, dave wrote:
Michael Coburn wrote:

With the exception of celebrities, most income in excess of half a
million is UNEARNED. *It is excessive "producer surplus" or it is
economic rent. *These funds are essentially stolen from the common people
and pocketed by the rich. *All wealth is earned or naturally occurring.
But all too often the collectors of the wealth are not the producers of
the wealth. *And the redistribution of this stolen prosperity is the
primary job of governments.

- Anybody who uses money to "keep score"
- is an enemy of the people.

Dave - In God We Trust !

all others swipe your cards* ~ RHF

* or pay cash