Communism is the means to make everybody poor (or, as often, dead.)
Wow, that is profound! Where you able to come up with this just by yourself?
(1) "What" was it that the "poor" had before we robbed them?
480)460-2350 | |480)460-2142 | Brass Rat |Interesting observation. Paradoxically, communism seems to CAUSE A LOT
Good one, Don !!
480)460-2350 | |480)460-2142 | Brass Rat |I need 10 gorgeous blondes for some orgasmic fun. Would I get them under
I still say we need to let people use the internet to either vote for or
against many of the rediculout bills that get get passed in washington. Bet
you would see government spending drop by 75 percent in the first year
needs.
I still say we need to let people use the internet to either vote for or
Captilaism has two common senses: 1) a political system in which the
If you had a new corvette, you could probably get a Hummer
Well, I suggest you don't rely on the Marxist definition of Capitalism.
I doubt he did, since *I* wrote it.
Families of 4 earning under $40K can't even afford medical insurance in
Oh, so you get to define what *MY* needs are. I'll stick with Capitalism,
That's what *she* said."DarkMatter" <DarkMatter@thebarattheendoftheuniverse.org> wrote in message
news:kvprfv4eeo59bdrm5ele4pg0d6ee8ku76s@4ax.com...
On Sat, 28 Jun 2003 18:27:22 +0000 (UTC), "Reg Edwards"
g4fgq.regp@btinternet.com> Gave us:
Capitalism is the means whereby the rich are enabled to rob the poor.
Every capitalist knows this.
Communism is the means to make everybody poor (or, as often, dead.)
You silly boy.
Socialism: From each according to his ability, to each according to hs
needs.
I need to go to Mars, and I need a new Corvette, and Hummer.
If you had a new corvette, you could probably get a Hummer
Even the species "deciding" amounts to the "pathetic fallacy" wherein"R. Steve Walz" <rstevew@armory.com> schreef in bericht
news:3EFCDED8.6ACA@armory.com...
John Fields wrote:
On Thu, 26 Jun 2003 23:34:14 +0200, "Frank Bemelman"
bemelmanx@euronet.nl.invalid> wrote:
I'm not sure if we gained that much, when we decided to start to
walking
on two legs... at least in those days we ate bananas all the time and
had
a good chance on copulating 3 times a day.
---
http://www.codehot.co.uk/lyrics/ijkl/kinks/apeman.htm
--
John Fields
---------------------
God, you sound like that insipid defective series, "Walking With
Cavemen" on Discovery!
We didn't "decide" anything. Some of us were able to stand a little
more erect and still function, and it became more useful. Those who
could tended to live a few weeks longer or could survive to breed 1%
better, that's all. Nobody "decided" to stand erect and thereby
"caused" it.
It was just a philosophical thought, perhaps I should have said 'the
species decided'. But now that we don't have to pick our bananas from
high trees and simple buy them in shops, we could of course try walking
again on 4 legs and put that 3-times-a-day thing back on the daily
schedule.
If that step is too big, we can start calling our arms fore-legs...
The decision is yours
Thanks,
Frank Bemelman
---------------------
And what few recognize is that even with the titular "end" of slavery