From: rdippold@qualcom.qualcomm.com (Ron Dippold)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.elections,misc.taxes,alt.society.civil-liberty
Subject: Re: What keeps me from being Lib. (was Re: FW: news release: abolish IRS)
Date: 9 Apr 92 19:30:37 GMT
Article-I.D.: qualcom.rdippold.702847837
Organization: Qualcomm, Inc., San Diego, CA

frazier@oahu.cs.ucla.edu (Greg Frazier) writes:
>I'll try to respond to some of the other resonses to my posting
>tomorrow or the next day (they're good), but this one needs some
>immediate slapping around.  Being that we live in a republic,
>it *is* the people who've decided that vaccination is "good",
>and we *are* the ones who decided that some tax money should
>go toward vaccination programs, but that most of the funding
>should come from private insurance or the parents.  

We also decided that blacks weren't really people.  We also decided
that Social Security should support someone's drug habit, and a huge
number of other reprehensible decisions.  Just because a group of
people are able to impose their will on someone else at the expense of
their rights does not mean that it is a good thing.


>doesn't mean it wasn't there.  Depending on "generaous people"
>being willing to give to a "worthy cause" is pretty naive.

And mugging others to support that "worthy cause" is pretty crooked.


>It's like with public radio - they get all of these people to
>pledge donations, and then have to go through hell and high
>water to actually get the pledgers to cough up the dough.

Maybe they might consider programming that people actually like to
support their other programs?  Why am I supposed to subsidize someone
else's ability to see Masterpiece Theater or The 90's?


>If you want people to pay, you've got to get them to agree that it
>is the right thing to do and then have a mechanism to force
>them to cough up.  Sad, but there it is.

Well, hell, there's not a lot more I can say about this, is there?
Hitler, Stalin, and Al Capone couldn't have said it better.


>>I believe it's due to environmental awareness.  People actually care
>>about the environment now.  It's profitable to be seen as green, and
>>harmful to the bottom line if you're caught polluting, in terms of
>>public spending.

>WRONG!  Wrong, wrong, wrong.  At lease, IMHO - I have as little data
>as you on this point, but people don't have the attention span to
>adequately punish a polluting company.

Yes, I forgot the Liberal view that the public is always stupid,
incompetent, and incapable of making the right decision, requiring the
enlightened elite to do all their thinking for them.

it's not just the people outside the company, it's the people inside
the company as well.


>>>the notion of individuals taking co's/corp'ns to court and suing if
>>>they feel that the co. in question is polluting too much.

>>Why sue?  If you can show they're damaging your property, they need to
>>pay you restitution or go to jail, just as if they'd taken a crowbar
>>to your car or house.

>You show that they're damaging your property by going to court.
>That's suing.

Do I need to sue to prove that someone mugged me?


>Several people have made comments along these lines - I'll
>try to address them tomorrow.  For now, let me say that the
>quotes I've heard attributed to Marrou contradict this
>pretty hard.

He's talking about long-range goals as well.
-- 
Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away.  -- Dick