Re: Collective Salvation

It's based on theft and coercion.

These are bad things; if you like being robbed at gunpoint to pay other people's bills, then move to a country that doesn't claim to be the "Land of the Free."

Thanks, Rich

It plain doesn't work. As has been proven time and again.

Often the collection tool can be summed up in one word: Kalashnikov.

In his manifesto he blessed Lenin's approach. And that was a disaster.

Jesus teaches compassion for each other, caring for each other. God does _not_ endorse freeloading and laziness, things that inevitably fester in an entitlement society. I am not good in memorizing bible passages but I can find it if you want me to.

It isn't. If at all, capitalism is about growth on an individual scale. Being better than the competition, eating their lunch. Quite a natural habit of mankind. It's what America is based on and that's a good thing. Still, we are a compassionate people, I have never seen such an abundance of free-will giving as in America.

Capitalism will find solutions then, too. Only free enterprise can do that, and most of all small business.

Tim, I won't see your response unless someone else answers it. Had to ditch the whole Google domain because it was infested with spam and they do not listen. Can you get a "real" news account?

Richard The Dreaded Libertarian wrote:

In Communism, man exploits man. In Capitalism, it's the other way around.

ALL government is about re-distribution of wealth. The ongoing controversy is always the proportions. The current (NeoCon) plan is "Take from everyone who isn't already rich and give that to those who are already wealthy". (It's channeled thru corporations so it isn't quite so obvious.)

Granted, the most frightening aspect of Soviet and Chinese communism is actually their totalitarian leaning. There isn't much to fear from a communist government run democratically, i.e. based on the desires of the people.

But therein lies the problem. If all decisions are delegated to the collective wishes of the people, then this collective becomes all powerful. And since a pure democracy is impractical, the bureaucracy that actually implements the governing system becomes all powerful as well. The power of our system (in the USA, Britain and others) is that the power of the government is restricted. Some decisions are made democratically, some by representatives. But the Constitution (or similar documents in other countries) restrict the government's power.

It's disingenuous for the right wing to pick on Obama, or any other Democrat, for referring to 'the collective'. The GOP (particularly under Bush) has made significant inroads into the rights of individuals. And he has done so by executive order, much as the Soviet Union did when it existed. Fortunately, Democrats, and the few remaining true Republicans have challenged him on some of his activities. There's really nothing wrong with the citizens of a country, as a collective, deciding to do something, as long as it is subjected to suitable restrictions. Those that fear 'the collective' are most likely up to something that 'the collective' wouldn't approve of, or the law wouldn't allow.

Back in the days of McCarthy, we feared Communism (capital 'C') because it was an organization directed by a foreign power intent on exerting its influence over us. And it attempted to do so by recruiting key opinion makers and government officials to do its bidding out of the public's view, rather than appealing openly to the masses. But today, the current administration takes its marching orders from other foreign powers, like sovereign wealth funds, the Mossad and Irgun. Where is the reincarnation of Joe McCarthy when we really need him?

Paul, I'm a wee bit slow ;-)

Could you please cite what rights (as a citizen) it is that I've lost?

...Jim Thompson

Nuh-uh. Capitalism is about individual achievement. If you don't want to be exploited, don't do the deal. But that implies a measurable amount of Common Sense.

Right, which is why government is bad.

Oh, you and your corporophobia! Sheesh! The only way corporations can make any money is to make their customers happy. The government just takes what they want, and wave a smoke screen by hyping up the boogieman du jour.

Here's the difference between Government and The Mob:

Thanks, Rich

Jim Thomps>Paul, I'm a wee bit slow ;-)

It would be easier to list those you have left: You can own a gun; you can pray; you don't have to house a Redcoat.

Amendment IV

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue; but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

That's only quoting the 4th Amendment. Please cite those events where you claim my rights have been circumvented. Don't give me any of the generalized leftist BS, cite some real facts. I know it's hard for you weenies to manage that, but PLEASE TRY ;-)

...Jim Thompson

JeffM wrote in news:35310af6-ffcf-4d2f-927a-bab578c9ad80 @k37g2000hsf.googlegroups.com:

Heh ;)

I suppose that unless I get copies if the FBI's 'National Security Letters' via an FOIA request, you'll just claim that the news surrounding this issue was manufactured as a left wing conspiracy.

Actually, they do listen, spam is way down. Care to take a peek beyond the velvet rope and see? And no, I cannot access Charter's news server remotely.

Tim

C'mon, what's the point? It would be pretty daft for anyone to assume that electronically transmitted data is 100% safe, wouldn't it? And that has nothing to do with where one lives, as has been evidenced by breaches in Europe that were leaked.

As far as I am concerned life in the US is pretty darn good. Yeah, we may complain about the housing bubble, this, that and the other thing. But we have food on the table and we do not have to look over our shoulders before chatting with neighbors. That's different in many, many other countries. So let's keep things in perspective.

Of COURSE you have no complaints - You're one of them.

Do you own a handgun? Do you expect to use it for household protection?

If you did, (say some zonked-out liberal hippie freak illegal immigrant decides that hocking your stuff for drugs would be a good idea) would the cops haul you away and charge _you_ with a crime?

Thanks, Rich

Not in many states.

Well, if you want to.

My wife has a red coat, can I toss her?

You arrive at LAX with your notebook computer. One can easily equate the information stored on that notebook computer as being one's 'papers' as so described above.

Try to stop the government from searching and siezing your notebook if they should so wish to.

Just like at the auction: going, going, gone.

Read your airline ticket fine print. You explicitly agree to the searches by TSA, or you don't fly. You don't have a RIGHT to fly.

What does it matter, you can't spell ;-)

...Jim Thompson

The difference is that the EU raised a red flag about it. The collective response of most Americans has been to yawn.

Lets see what happens when you order a restricted part and homeland security wants to know why.

About 20 years ago, I was returning from Vancouver BC with some rather exotic electronic components. When I came through US Customs, I decided that I'd better declare them, due to their value. I got the third degree from a customs official, who knew nothing about electronics, but suspected (correctly) that these were unusual components.

I finally pointed out that I was _entering_ the US with them, not smuggling them out and that there was no restriction on my doing so. Today, I don't think I'd even try that.

Worse yet, customs/homeland security has no expertise in analyzing the sorts of things Thompson is likely to have on his laptop. Stuff like proprietary designs, proposals, bids, etc.

They forward a copy of this stuff to various experts in the field. Maybe Jim's competition.