From: fcrary@ucsu.Colorado.EDU (Frank Crary)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.democratc.d,alt.politics.election,ba.poliitcs,co.politics,nj.politics,ny.politics,talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: VOTE, BABY, VOTE!
Date: 14 Nov 92 01:07:09 GMT
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder

In article <BZS.92Nov13013032@world.std.com> bzs@world.std.com (Barry Shein) writes:
>>If you didn't have any tank-building equipment, you wouldn't
>>have gotten the contract.

>Bzzzt, wrong.
>You really think companies invest in tank-building equipment and then
>hope perhaps the govt will give them a contract?

I can't speak for tank-building, but aerospace companies do, in
fact, risk their own capitol in this way. 

>>If you can't objectively measure it, how do you propose to compare
>>it to the benifits the rich derive from government. A subjective
>>measure isn't sufficient since, by definition, no one agrees on
>>it.

>You're missing something here, only a MAJORITY need agree or disagree,
>not everyone.

The only a majority needs to agree in order to act. But that reduces
your agrument to, "The majority wants to, so they can get away with
doing whatever they to a minority."

>>>Oh don't tell me, you're against the draft (even in WWII?) Sorry
>>>buddy, maybe it's too late, maybe it's PAYBACK time for some folks,
>>>swallow the same bullshit they tried to feed me, only not the same,
>>>only money for them.

>>Oh, I see: Punishing the rich is _revenge_ for the draft, and that
>>makes it a good and moral thing.

>No, it's not revenge.

"They did it to me, so now I'm going to do it to them, it's PAYBACK
time." _is_ revenge (unless you have your own, personal, meaning
of the word.)

>It's not punishment.
>Any more than being drafted was ever "punishment".
>They said "it's your DUTY" when I was 18 in 1970 and we were running
>an all expenses paid meat-grinder.

They were making up excuses, to justify doing what they
wanted (fair or not); just as you are making up exuses (about
the rich getting more out of government, etc...) to justify 
doing what you want. In neither case does the excuse really justify
the action.

>>Since I wasn't even alive 50 years ago (as is true of about 65% or so 
>>of the population, rich and poor alike), are they really a rational
>>target for your revenge?

>Are you governed by the Nazis 50 years later?

I also speak English, not Anglo-Saxon, 926 years after the
Norman conquest. Does that mean I'm responsible for all the
crimes of William the Bastard?

>Look Frank, all you come off as is: "Me and mine, screw everyone
>else". You may convince yourself you are moralizing, but moralizing
>has very little to do with rationalizing selfishness.

Since I'm not even close to the rich we are talking about taxing
(I'm living off under a tenth of the incomes Clinton is talking
about taxing), I don't see how you can conceivably claim I'm
arguing out of selfishness. If anyone was, you would be: You are
advocating a position that will help you financially (unless,
of course, you make over $200,000/year...)

                                          Frank Crary
                                          CU Boulder
Xref: sparky alt.politics.clinton:16260 alt.politics.democrats.d:357 alt.politics.elections:23009 ba.politics:6862 co.politics:1643 ne.politics:2779 nj.politics:578 or.politics:480 ny.politics:104 talk.politics.misc:58687