Should food be a right?

[ttystikk]

Luck has little to do with it. You discount hard work in that equation.

When the lazy scion of an aristocrat is likely to end up better off than the hard working one of a middle class family, luck of the (family) draw is the determining factor. This is the situation in America TODAY. Platitudes are just a smokescreen.

 

[Rob Roy]

If those who have food and prosperity aren't willing to share them with those willing to earn their own, then they don't deserve their good fortune. Because that's all that separates the fabulously wealthy from the desperately poor; just plain, simple, stupid luck. Only the weak minded think they actually deserve their station in life.

Your statement is not universally applicable and attempts to create something axiomatic from circumstances which are variable from person to person.

However, since you appear to think it is axiomatic, I'd like a double cheese burger, with some chips, and a dill pickle, and where's the fucking ketchup anyway?

 

[Rob Roy]

When the lazy scion of an aristocrat is likely to end up better off than the hard working one of a middle class family, luck of the (family) draw is the determining factor. This is the situation in America TODAY. Platitudes are just a smokescreen.

So, if a person accumulates wealth they have no right to give or share that wealth with people that they chose ?

Nice use of scion though.

 

[Fogdog]

So, if a person accumulates wealth they have no right to give or share that wealth with people that they chose ?

Nice use of scion though.

actually, the "right" to pass on wealth after death is a legal construct and not a "natural law".

 

[Rob Roy]

Rob Roy only reads meaningless stuff written by old dead philosophers who never amounted to much. He's only interested in the hypothetical. The Constitution was written by people that meant for the document to work. And it does. Much to Rob's chagrin.

 

[Rob Roy]

actually, the "right" to pass on wealth is a legal construct and not a "natural law".

So, Ogg the caveman shouldn't bequeath his stores of dried berries and mastodon meat to his progeny ?

 

[Fogdog]

View attachment 3676705

As I said, meaningless stuff written by old dead men who never amounted to much.

 

[Fogdog]

So, Ogg the caveman shouldn't bequeath his stores of dried berries and mastodon meat to his progeny ?

What killed Ogg?

 

[Rob Roy]

As I said, meaningless stuff written by old dead men who never amounted to much.

In other words, if you had read it, you couldn't possibly offer an on point refutation, therefore best to malign the author.
Got it.

 

[Rob Roy]

What killed Ogg?

Parasites and neem oil hadn't been invented yet.

 

[Fogdog]

In other words, if you had read it, you couldn't possible offer an on point refutation, therefore best to malign the author.
Got it.

He was just another useless philosopher who never said anything worthwhile. He made his bones lecturing old former Copperheads with claptrap about how bad Civil War was. Impractical, naive and mostly just an irritant. Nobodys like you like him. His stuff was all hypothetical. He died a nobody. Just like you will pretty soon.

 

[Fogdog]

Parasites and neem oil hadn't been invented yet.

Ogg passed on at least one of his parasites. It grew up to be Rob Roy

 

[Rob Roy]

He was just another useless philosopher who never said anything worthwhile. He made his bones lecturing old former Copperheads with claptrap about how bad Civil War was. Impractical, naive and mostly just an irritant. Nobodys like you like him. His stuff was all hypothetical. He died a nobody. Just like you will pretty soon.

 

[Grandpapy]

View attachment 3676705

It worked removing England. Got to be some Authority in there somewhere.

 

[Rob Roy]

Ogg passed on at least one of his parasites. It grew up to be Rob Roy

Sometimes your rebuttals fall short of astute.

 

[Rob Roy]

It worked removing England. Got to be some Authority in there somewhere.

The document you are referring to, is the Declaration of Independence, not the Constitution.

Also, if you read the Declaration of Independence, you would see the sentiments expressed are about protection of individuals rights, rather than redefining them as something an external party can manipulate at the expense of said individual.

I don't think it was written very well though as it presumes that one form of government is necessarily replaced by another, and that by doing so, individuals rights will be protected. That of course hasn't happened.

 

[Grandpapy]

The document you are referring to, is the Declaration of Independence, not the Constitution.

Also, if you read the Declaration of Independence, you would see the sentiments expressed are about protection of individuals rights, rather than redefining them as something an external party can manipulate at the expense of said individual.

I don't think it was written very well though as it presumes that one form of government is necessarily replaced by another, and that by doing so, individuals rights will be protected. That of course hasn't happened.

I'm medicated,,,
Without a Declaration there was no need for a Constitution, just ask King George. It set the tone of the day.

No, I agree it wasn't written well, it lacks the protections from Corporations, we came close in the 70's until loopholes came into play.

 

[Rob Roy]

I'm medicated,,,
Without a Declaration there was no need for a Constitution, just ask King George. It set the tone of the day.

No, I agree it wasn't written well, it lacks the protections from Corporations, we came close in the 70's until loopholes came into play.

The problem isn't confined to the content of the documents.

The problem begins before then, one of the unaddressed problems is the presumption of consent of all the people in a given area, when that individual consent is demonstrably false.

That contradiction is discussed very well by Lysander Spooner in his essay "The Constition of No Authority". Nobody has rebutted his essay yet.

Please enjoy your medication. I'm about to indulge myself. Peace.

 

[Rob Roy]

Can't ignore them unto starvation. The ones that survive come back with Kalashnikovs or bombs.

Countries that improve the education of women concurrently see reductions in family size. Cut population by educating people, not starving them.

Could you please explain what the differences between "education" and "indoctrination" are ?

This could be interesting.

 

[Fogdog]

Could you please explain what the differences between "education" and "indoctrination" are ?

This could be interesting.

yadda yadda yadda no government yadda

Natural law? there is no natural law. Everything and I mean everything about humanity is based on human nature, human society, its history and its evolution. For example, there is no ownership of anything if one can't defend it. Our society sets up the principles that Turkey Lysander expounded upon inexorably, as if "natural laws" were more than the human legal constructs that they are. As if god invented them, but that makes no sense because he was an atheist. He was a windbag gadfly for his long and unremarkable and worthless life. Where he made his money was as a social gadfly after the Civil War. His stance on what happened then brought in the anti-unionist audiences to listen to Lysander tell them how they were right to oppose the Union. Of course it was all just made up shit. With a message tailored to speak to people who were racist nutjob fools who payed to hear him speak. His audience hasn't changed.