>Tristan,
>
>So far you have said you don't mean either of the following.
>1) "unfreedom produces wealth"
>2) "wealth causes less freedom"
>Yet for some reason that escapes me you still seem to think there is
>some sort of trade off between freedom and wealth.
Dear Craig,
There is, with the current state of the world. Could I inquire as to
where you live? Well, actually that's not even relevant. Do you have a
slave number where ever you are in the world? Do you pay taxes, etc? Are
there license plates on your car(s)? All of this bullshit is not what I
consider freedom.
>> Rather, I mean to say, if the average Joe has a
>> choice between his principles (staying unwealthy because he will not give
>> us his freedom) or wealth (ahh, it's just a little freedom to sacrifice,
>> that's all), he will invariable choose to have more wealth at the expense
>> of his freedom.
>
>It is just the opposite: freedom and wealth go together. Giving up
>freedom
>leads to poverty not wealth.
Please quote me where I said giving up freedom leads to poverty. I
didn't. So therefore you are throwing words in my mouth. It's apparent
that you have a much difference perspective of what freedom means.
Indeed, freedom will bring much greater wealth. However, given a choice
between freedom and wealth, the average person will choose wealth. If it
means they have to pay taxes, and must be branded as cattle with a slave
number, then so be it.
Obviously we have different notions of freedom.
Tristan
P.S. Please stop hitting "reply to all" button, or whatever the
equivalent is on your machine. I am subscribed to the list. I don't need
to receive more than one of the same message, please.
---
You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: [email protected]
To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
