How many of you parents would like the driving age raised to 18?
in [Drive]
|
From: tankfixer on 16 Feb 2010 23:38 In article <9drmn51vvlisnl9r49ob4b2p8vchvnfhee(a)4ax.com>, mrLookout(a)yahoo.com says... > And a monarchy has TOTAL control and they flourish. Go ahead and recount how many monarchies with total control remain
From: Matthew Russotto on 16 Feb 2010 20:01 In article <hlckhs$qnd$1(a)news.eternal-september.org>, Brent <tetraethylleadREMOVETHIS(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > >Prove me wrong. Name a society that has thrived under government >micromanagement and a police state. Singapore. (It is, AFAIK, the only one.) -- The problem with socialism is there's always someone with less ability and more need.
From: Lookout on 16 Feb 2010 21:42 On Tue, 16 Feb 2010 19:01:44 -0600, russotto(a)grace.speakeasy.net (Matthew Russotto) wrote: >In article <hlckhs$qnd$1(a)news.eternal-september.org>, >Brent <tetraethylleadREMOVETHIS(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >> >>Prove me wrong. Name a society that has thrived under government >>micromanagement and a police state. > >Singapore. > >(It is, AFAIK, the only one.) Many monarchies are alive and well.
From: Brent on 16 Feb 2010 23:47 On 2010-02-17, Lookout <mrLookout(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > On Wed, 17 Feb 2010 03:51:23 +0000 (UTC), Brent ><tetraethylleadREMOVETHIS(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > I've already pointed out there are many monarchies that flourish right > now. You're idea has been squashed. I see you're a product of the government schools or something just as bad. Monarchy != control freak. Monarchies have ranged from rather free countries to rather oppressive ones, just like democracies. Although the later tends to become more oppressive over time. >>It's called context of your response. That's why I explained it to you >>with ()'s. > > And you're wrong. I did NOT mean that. Then what did you mean? >>> Many monarchies have and are still. >>Monarchy != control freak. Monarchy is private ownership of the state. >>An enlightened owner of such a state knows not to be a control freak for >>that would destroy the asset he may wish to pass down to his children. > "Society declines as government control increases" > YOUR WORDS. And a monarchy has TOTAL control and they flourish. No, a monarchy does not have total control by definition. Monarchies that endure do so because they don't have total control and don't attempt to achieve it. When a monarchy achieves and excerizes total control revolution is usually the result. >>Actually many monarchies tend to be less controlling than some if not >>many democracies. > Now you're back stepping. What you said was "Society declines as > government control increases". You lose again. > Now the blah blah blah as he tries to change the subject It does. And you brought up monarchies. Your ignorance is not my fault. It's not my fault that your grade school taught you wrong. >>The US war of independence was fought over far less >>taxation (as percentage of income) than is extracted from us for the >>federal government todal. The regulations of George III were much much >>less than that of the US federal government as well. We are far more >>controlled than what the war of independence was fought to prevent. >>> I just proved you wrong. >>> But you won't admit it. >>All you've proven is that your ignorance is greater than previously >>thought. > Nope. Monarchies have TOTAL control yet the still exist. > Your bullshit has been proven wrong. Monarchies range from very free countries to very oppressive ones. Monarchy does not mean total control. Monarchy is the private ownership of the state (as opposed to public ownership), nothing more. A good analogy is that a monarchy is like a family owned business while a something like the USA is like a publically traded corporation.
From: Brent on 16 Feb 2010 23:48
On 2010-02-17, Lookout <mrLookout(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > On Wed, 17 Feb 2010 03:54:56 +0000 (UTC), Brent ><tetraethylleadREMOVETHIS(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > >>On 2010-02-17, Matthew Russotto <russotto(a)grace.speakeasy.net> wrote: >>> In article <hlckhs$qnd$1(a)news.eternal-september.org>, >>> Brent <tetraethylleadREMOVETHIS(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>Prove me wrong. Name a society that has thrived under government >>>>micromanagement and a police state. >>> >>> Singapore. >>> >>> (It is, AFAIK, the only one.) >> >>Economically it is ranked as the second freest country in it's region. >>It has thrived as controls have eased. > > It's still a society that is under total control and it thrives. > You lose again. It's not under total control. The fact it is considered one freest economically in the world shows it is not. |