Hi Allie, Welcome to the group.
It does not mean that people who are down on their luck shouldn't take government welfare. I can give other reasons not to, but that is purely by choice. If a system is available and it is the best option available to you, you should take it. Though I believe that we would be far better served by a privatized postal system does not mean I won't ever use the USPS to send a letter. On the other hand, we should eliminate welfare systems as they are a means of stealing from one to pay another, and collect quite alot of that for your friends in between. -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of allie rodgers Sent: Friday, June 30, 2006 5:34 PM To: [email protected] Subject: RE: [Libertarian] Re: Youthful Entrepreneurs im new to this group and debate but the statement here says "Good! Libertarianism is opposed to all gov welfare programs.Maybe it will stimulate more capitalistic enterprise." Does this mean that people who are down on their luck, shouldnt take gov. welfare programs?? Some people arent enterpreneur types and this just doesnt fit my belief system but wanted to understand more of what this means? ALLIE Cory Nott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I'm not missing anything at all John. I've already said that before that I wouldn't cut a little program for the Ute before other priorities are met, and I'd appreciate it if you take the time to read a little more carefully before you make assumptions about what I think of the current situation. Let me refresh your memory. Your original post was this: "THey are the poorest people I have ever known, contrary to all that BS about Native Americans getting all kinds of money from the government. If any of you have been paying attention to Bush's proposed funding cuts for next year you will know he intends to cut way way back on everything basic the government funds for these people." Mark said this: "Good! Libertarianism is opposed to all gov welfare programs. Maybe it will stimulate more capitalistic enterprise." You then called Mark "naive" and "prejudiced" as if not taking money at gunpoint is a form of racism. That's why I jumped in. Mark is right about Libertarianism, but for the record (again) in this case I disagree - it doesn't serve to cut the programs for the Ute in favor of funding warfare or other programs that benefit those who support him. If it's across the board cuts in taxation and spending, I'm for that. -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of John Stroebel Sent: Thursday, June 29, 2006 11:38 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [Libertarian] Re: Youthful Entrepreneurs Cory, "should"...and "is"...they are two different things. The government IS in the business of redistributing wealth....they are taking OUR wealth and giving it to corperate giants like Haliburten. You are missing the forest through the trees. . [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] --------------------------------- Sneak preview the all-new Yahoo.com. It's not radically different. Just radically better. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] ForumWebSiteAt http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
