Well, you didn't change my opinions, ornamental, but I salute your fervor. Yes- no need to toss healthcare into post. I suppose scanning some books on Marie Antoinette/French Revolution earlier tilted my "pouf".
On Jul 31, 1:46 pm, ornamentalmind <[email protected]> wrote: > “How so? [laws defending ownership stimulate poverty] Do you feel > everyone has equal talent and ambition?” – rig > > OK, deconstructing a little, without the very notion of ownership, > there would be no wealth nor poverty…at least not as we see and define > it today. Also, the notion that ‘stimulating economic growth’ is a > good thing ignores all too much, even though it is one of the most > prevalent memes pushed by the corporate owned media today. > When you ask about talent and ambition, this tacitly assumes that > these traits are those held by the economic elite…they may be and they > may not be. In other words, it is a non-sequitur. It also tacitly > implies that such people should be rewarded with material gain for > whatever traits they exhibit in acquiring them, even if it is through > inheritance or theft. > > “Ownership also provides jobs/income and products.” – rig > > Uhhh, did I suggest that it didn’t? Quite the reverse. Here you > apparently suggest that this is a good thing. I am not convinced. Of > course, I will keep the topic on track by not giving examples of > different cultures and groups of people that do not conform to what > you apparently accept as innate and divinely given systems. > > “ There is a real threat to Democracy and capitalism with Obama's > dictat to "spread the wealth around" or the inclusion of abortion and > end of life policies being debated in the healthcare legislation which > determines who will live and who will die- perhaps our version of the > guillotine- USA style.” – rig > > Geezzzz, to me, this sounds like a Faux Infotainment rant! ;-) Rather > than conflating issues that are not related in the least, I will yet > again deconstruct. > There is no threat to Democracy. This is propaganda. Get a grip! Look > at the facts rather than the self serving attempts at influencing > public opinion. Please! Also, in no way does capitalism go hand in > hand with democracy. Nor is there any extant pure form of capitalism > on the planet. Now, IF one wishes to criticize BOs stances, let’s take > them on a case by case basis. I could start a very very long list. In > most ways I find how he has been leading including the advisors and > administrators he has to be lacking. This has nothing to do with the > invented and promulgated fear mongering about the notion of socialism. > This has been addressed ad nauseam…and found to not be a problem in > any way nor different from historical policies overall in the US. > (With apologies to those of you from different countries…we here in > the USA are quite provincial) > Oh, yes, I forgot, somehow you include abortion in the topic of > defending ownership?????!!!!!! If anything, you make the point FOR > abortion!!! We can do another topic about it if you wish. > The same for end of life policies that do need to be debated further… > and have little to do with healthcare legislation contrary to what the > highly paid (highest) lobbyists in the world would have you believe. > Vested interests are doing their best to survive by influencing public > opinion. The problem here is propaganda and fear tactics rather than > an open and honest debate is being used. The result is an ignorant > population. What has anyone heard about single payer insurance > lately!??!! There is a group of people attempting to get a law passed > to force the media to at least discuss it. A truly sad state of > affairs in a country that touts itself as being the greatest and most > democratic and freest etc. Very sad indeed! > “guillotine-USA style”….rigsy, this hyperbole is even beneath you! > > “ The "poor" are dazzled by celebrity and the opportunity to get > something for nothing plus a deep-seated resentment of class > differences.” – rig > > Where to start…just what the heck do you mean by dazzled by > celebrity??? Do you mean that only poor people go to the movies, read > People magazine etc.? Oh, and as to getting something for nothing…I > would posit that even IF this were the case (it isn’t) they are > clearly not as successful at doing so as the rich are!!!! > Now we come to the pièce de résistance. “…deep-seated resentment of > class differences”. This appears to be one of the most hateful > comments of the group to me. > First, IF it is the case, why shouldn’t it be? Secondly, are you > including yourself in this attitude?...the deep-seated resentment? If > not, I suggest you reflect a bit. As I’ve said often, there is a > common suspicion of anyone different. This includes different economic > strata. And, for those who succumb to such suspicions, whether valid > or not, they can NOT be defined as only the lower economic tier. > > “…The very rich with no conscience/hope have undoubtedly taken steps > to avoid the revolutionary changes already.” – rig > > First, the ‘revolutionary changes’ as you call them have been taken > over the last couple of decades. What is being proposed now is one > small attempt at returning to being able to deliver quality health > care to people rather than a system based upon the ‘bottom line’. IF > you think that “socialized medicine” will treat the poor and aging > poorly…check out what a system based on the bottom line does….look > around. > Yes, ‘they’ clearly have taken steps to avoid a return to a more > egalitarian view of health care. Since the USA doesn’t allow much > torture and physical coercion within its borders (most of them anyway) > yet, the main avenues available are political influence/purchase and > public opinion control/influence. Sadly, from what I see you type, my > guess is that there has been some success here. :-( > > On Jul 31, 3:59 am, rigsy03 <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > How so? Do you feel everyone has equal talent and ambition? Ownership > > also provides jobs/income and products. There is a real threat to > > Democracy and capitalism with Obama's dictat to "spread the wealth > > around" or the inclusion of abortion and end of life policies being > > debated in the healthcare legislation which determines who will live > > and who will die- perhaps our version of the guillotine- USA style. > > The "poor" are dazzled by celebrity and the opportunity to get > > something for nothing plus a deep-seated resentment of class > > differences. The very rich with no conscience/hope have undoubtedly > > taken steps to avoid the revolutionary changes already. > > > On Jul 30, 10:23 pm, ornamentalmind <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > “…Broadly speaking, laws defending ownership stimulate economic > > > growth.” – DJ > > > > Don, quit true! And, let us not forget the rest of that equation, laws > > > defending ownership stimulate poverty. > > > > On Jul 30, 3:43 am, Don Johnson <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > I don't know the show or the character of the investigator but I'd > > > > guess it was just a way to differentiate his victim(the one he's > > > > assigned to) from some other murdered person. I don't see it as > > > > claiming ownership. My brother, my sister, my school, my band, my job > > > > etc. Doesn't so much claim ownership but more like claims belonging > > > > and/or allegiance. > > > > > I have learned it's generally not a good idea to grow attached to > > > > 'things.' The only thing I might dash into a burning building to > > > > retrieve is my guitar. A Gibson acoustic given as a wedding gift from > > > > my wife. Beautiful mellow tonal quality. Superbly unique as well. > > > > I'd never seen anyone with one until The Edge played one just like > > > > mine at a late night U2 appearance on The Conan O'Brien Show a few > > > > years ago. Judging by the serial number mine was the second one made. > > > > I wouldn't take 10 thousand for it but I'm sure it's probably only > > > > worth 2 or 3. I love that guitar and it is MINE. > > > > > Now, when we get into property rights or Bush's theme of an 'ownership > > > > society' we are talking about a whole different ball of wax I'm > > > > assuming Fran wasn't really referring to. Someone has already stated > > > > the relationship to freedom. This link helps describe some of the > > > > reasons I happen to agree with this connection. Broadly speaking, > > > > laws defending ownership stimulate economic growth. > > > > >http://www.heritage.org/index/Default.aspx > > > > > dj > > > > > On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 4:50 AM, deripsni<[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > I repeat, its the teams job, with the help of the community. If the > > > > > lead investigator wants to the take the input and help of others and > > > > > make it his/her own, in my mind thats the actions of an insecure > > > > > person enforcing their position. If you prefer to see it differently, > > > > > thats okay ;-] > > > > > > On Jul 29, 7:47 pm, BB47 <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > >> Could it possibly be you are taking that innocent little phrase a > > > > >> tad too far? The lead investigator is in charge. I am grateful that > > > > >> they take a strong personal responsibility to find out not only what > > > > >> happened but to catch the murderer. To bring in the OJ case seems an > > > > >> odd support piece of your argument. Catching the suspect with enough > > > > >> evidence to go to court with is the guy's job, and that is the > > > > >> beginning of justice yes, but not the final result. > > > > > >> On Jul 29, 1:00 pm, deripsni <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > >> > A homicide investigation typically involves many people, not just > > > > >> > the > > > > >> > lead investigator. He/She gets assigned to the case and its a team > > > > >> > and > > > > >> > community effort, not one persons. There is no "I" in team. Calling > > > > >> > the victim "mine" seems to negate the involvement of the team and > > > > >> > the > > > > >> > community, without which many crimes would not get solved. Although > > > > >> > the investigator may be on a truth finding mission, unfortunately > > > > >> > justice isn't a police function, but a function of the > > ... > > read more »- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/Minds-Eye?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
