From: stephen@orchid.UCSC.EDU (x4604 (Hauskins))
Newsgroups: ba.politics
Subject: Re: Incredibly stupid left-wing BS
Date: 22 Nov 1992 22:52:51 GMT
Organization: Santa Cruz
NNTP-Posting-Host: orchid.ucsc.edu

In article <1992Nov21.031219.25389@netcom.com> phil@netcom.com (Phil Ronzone) writes:
>In article <1ejubeINNl73@darkstar.UCSC.EDU> stephen@orchid.UCSC.EDU (x4604 (Hauskins)) writes:
>    >If you had been listening lately a panel of scientist have
>    >come out and said that we need to look at population as a
>    >serious problem and a threat to our well being.
>
>Uh, which set of authority figures was that? The same group that said in
>1965 we'd have worldwide starvation by now? The ones that said AIDS was
>not a health threat in 1984? Perhaps the ones that said traveling to the
>moon was impossible? Or that the world would only need a dozen or
>so computers?
>

No it wasn't- and I will find out who comprised the panel, and also they did
say there is always the possibility that results which could occur from their
scenarios, do not have to happen.  

But a strong point was brought home- one that I agree with- that is why go along
and wait for a disaster to strike.  Changing particular habits and processes in
our lifes now will gain us an advantage if particular scenarios should play out.

Many things, even in science, lie in the domain of prediction.  I do not think
a majority of scientists would make statements in the sense of absolutes. Unless
you talking about particular physical processes that we are subjected to everyday,
e.g. if you jump out of an airplane at 20000 feet you will probably hit the
ground eventually.

And also, in the future having a dozen or so computers may make sense they can
and probably will be powerful enough to serve every need- or don't you believe
that is possible?  Maybe you do believed the moon story?

But I always forget that you are a great authority of many issues. In fact you
give all kinds of statements about this and that but never anyway to back them
up, except by the old name calling process, ad hominem attacks are your speciality.

>    >Private property has been one of the main foundational
>    >structures for war in this world. The have nots will always
>    >being trying to get what the haves have. This is a long and
>    >ingrained process that has been going on for 1000's of years.
>
>Wow -- and I thought Lenin was dead!! Silly me. Why, private property
>also causes theft. After all, no private property, no theft! And flies
>cause garbage too! Main foundational structure for garbage I believe ...
>

So flies cause garbage?  Let me see now I guess flies go to the stores and
pick things up and toss them about. Hmmm, and I always thought garbage was
caused by people throwing things about.  Or is this one of your clever sarcastic
statements- it is difficult to tell.

Well try reading some history.  Look at what wars are based upon, also revolutions.
In more modern times revolutions have centered on the redistribution of material
wealth. Of course we could and can look from another angle, and that is the
dogma which surrounds the creation of this materialistic grab bag game.

A question- would you fight or attempt to strong someone if they were trying
to take your private property?  Would you fight for the country if another country
or a ban of nomads were trying to take this country and its' property?  I believe
you dislike the government taxing you, becuase they use coercive methods, according
to you, so you should fight them, because what they are doing is taking your
private property.

>
>-- 
>I believe Gennifer Flowers.

You need a new signature - try one of my statements.
Newsgroups: ba.politics,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.elections,co.politics,ne.politics,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.democrats.d