Re: [second hand election spam] this by David Brin

Date view Thread view Subject view Author view

From: Wayne E Baisley (
Date: Wed Oct 18 2000 - 15:03:46 PDT

More geezer fodder, huh? ;-)

> That issue, alone, should eliminate any thought of voting Republican
> this year.

Assuming you like judicial activism. I don't.

> Don't get me wrong! I have every intention of getting into the upper
> brackets myself. I've already made some progress in that direction.
> And I plan to be sure that my children get some advantages from my
> success. But that's a far cry from entitling them to billions from
> goods and services they never did a thing to produce or provide to
> anyone. My success does not entitle them to a position in life that
> safeguards them from competition.

So, he thinks leaving a few million, out of a few billion, to the kids
will make them just like all middle-class kids everywhere? Guess what,
kids grow up with radically different advantages all the time. Like
health and talent. There are no level playing fields, and again, I
don't think it's the state's place to be our parents.

Besides, noone can consume billions in goods and services. The rest is
going to be invested. Is having a choice of profit v.s. charitable
targets so bad? Obviously, he thinks people with money will mostly
choose badly, and must be saved from themselves.

> Care to guess what'll happen to charitable giving if GWB gets his
> way?

Care to justify this amorphous threat?

> That's still a far cry from letting a small cadre of lazy preppies

I thought this wasn't about class warfare?

> Now comes along George W. Bush with his grand plan to "cut taxes" in
> a manner that blatantly gives fully half of the benefits to the
> richest 1%.

And why shouldn't excess taxes go back to the ones who actually shelled
out the cash? Besides, I think the number is more like only 20% to the
top 1%, which pays 1/3 of the taxes.

> scoop in billions without paying a penny of it to the nation that
> protects them, pays for the research, protects them, educates their
> workers, protects them, keeps the poor from rioting, protects them,
> maintains labor peace, protects them, enforces contracts, protects
> them, invests in saving the environment we all share and then
> protects the rich some more, in ten thousand more ways than they
> would ever willingly acknowledge.

Youse got billions dere, Mac. We's come to *protect* you, see, so hand
over duh cash and nobody gets hurt, right? Man, I hope they get their
own B1-B out of the deal, cuz that's an awful lot of protection money.

> It's ungrateful, churlish and just plain nuts.

Or, one might argue, constitutional. I don't recall reading anything
about there being caps on the pursuit of liberty and happiness (life not
being much of an issue for the legator). Sorry, I just think that this
is ordinary theft (well, grand larceny), in the name of social

> Anyone who wants the pyramid back is your political enemy, folks.

Kill those strawmen, damn them!

I'm still not buying crazy,

You're such an inspiration for the way I will never, ever choose to be.
Perfect Circle

Date view Thread view Subject view Author view

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Oct 18 2000 - 15:13:12 PDT