Republicans don't believe in Global Warming

On Nov 22, 12:41*am, "Jane_Galt" > wrote:
> "His Highness the TibetanMonkey & the Free Spirits of the Jungle"
> > *wrote :
>
>
>
> > On Nov 21, 8:51*pm, "Jane_Galt" > wrote:
> >> dr_jeff > *wrote :
>
> >> > taking public
> >> > transportation where available,
>
> >> That one is a joke. They spent tens of billions on light rail here. What
> >> percentage of commuters use it? Less than 1%! We still have the same
> >> traffic jams as before. And it rides around empty half the time.
>
> >> The car is one of the most individual rights supporting things ever
> >> invented and you socialists want to get rid of them and make us all
> >> dependent on collective transportation, which can coincidentally be shut
> >> down by socialist unions at a moment's notice.
>
> > So we are the only ones resisting the socialists who already have hi-
> > tech trains in Europe and Japan.
>
> What percentage of the driving population do those trains transport?
>
> Who paid for them? Were they economically feasible or did they require tax
> slavery to build?

I know it's hard to get something done in this day and age in the
United Selfish of America, but even the highway system required
collective effort. The race to the Moon required big money. And what
did we get from it?

What don't you dump NASA and the War on Drugs to save some money for
practical projects?

>
> There are actually such things as right and wrong, though I realize you're
> more the "any means to an end" type.
>
> You absolutely dont recognize self ownership of our lives.
>
> > It may also be taken as a sign of backwardness, you know.
>
> I suppose a servile could view free people as "backward".
>
> --
> - Jane Galt
>
> By taxing, borrowing and wasting money that the tax slaves must be forced
> to pay back, Government does NOT "create jobs", it NEVER HAS. It actually
> consumes and destroys the wealth that the private sector, which really DOES
> create jobs, could be using to do so!

I thought we still owe the money for the wars created by the
Republicans.

"His Highness the TibetanMonkey & the Free Spirits of the Jungle"
> wrote :

> I know it's hard to get something done in this day and age in the
> United Selfish of America,

Profit motive motivates people, while commies like you call it "selfish".

It's really just the drive to get the most value for what we produce by
spending our lives doing things. But that assumes that we own our lives and
deserve to be paid for what we spend them to produce.

In your world, the colective would own our lives.

"Give us your paychecks and we'll spend most of it and give you back what
we think you need."


> but even the highway system required
> collective effort.

Government, like other human relationships, should be voluntary. If people
want the government to make highways for them, they will contribute. If
not, it wont happen.

I'm against forced-collectivism, not voluntary relationships.

> The race to the Moon required big money. And what
> did we get from it?

What should "we" have gotten from something that wasnt profitable and that
people were forced into slavery to pay for?

That's what happens when forced-collectivist whims outweight individual
rights. Single moms get forced to give up milk and egg money for trips to
the moon, to satisfy the frivolous whims of the commissars who think they
know best what to spend our hard earned money on.

> What don't you dump NASA and the War on Drugs to save some money for
> practical projects?

I'd dump it all, make a Constitution that wouldnt allow government to
initiate force against the people, and make all government voluntarily
supported. Let people keep the money they work so hard to earn, and only
support the amount of government THEY want to have. Anything more doesnt
deserve to exist.

>> There are actually such things as right and wrong, though I realize
>> you'r
> e
>> more the "any means to an end" type.
>>
>> You absolutely dont recognize self ownership of our lives.
>>
>> > It may also be taken as a sign of backwardness, you know.
>>
>> I suppose a servile could view free people as "backward".
>>
>> --
>> - Jane Galt
>>
>> By taxing, borrowing and wasting money that the tax slaves must be
>> forced to pay back, Government does NOT "create jobs", it NEVER HAS. It
>> actually consumes and destroys the wealth that the private sector,
>> which really DO
> ES
>> create jobs, could be using to do so!
>
> I thought we still owe the money for the wars created by the
> Republicans.

Evading the issue.

We owe money for all the borrowing and drunken spending our government has
done.


--
- Jane Galt

By taxing, borrowing and wasting money that the tax slaves must be forced
to pay back, Government does NOT "create jobs", it NEVER HAS. It actually
consumes and destroys the wealth that the private sector, which really
DOES create jobs, could be using to do so!

On Nov 22, 9:38*pm, "Jane_Galt" > wrote:
> "His Highness the TibetanMonkey & the Free Spirits of the Jungle"
> > *wrote :
>
> > I know it's hard to get something done in this day and age in the
> > United Selfish of America,
>
> Profit motive motivates people, while commies like you call it "selfish".
>
> It's really just the drive to get the most value for what we produce by
> spending our lives doing things. But that assumes that we own our lives and
> deserve to be paid for what we spend them to produce.
>
> In your world, the colective would own our lives.
>
> "Give us your paychecks and we'll spend most of it and give you back what
> we think you need."
>
> > but even the highway system required
> > collective effort.
>
> Government, like other human relationships, should be voluntary. If people
> want the government to make highways for them, they will contribute. If
> not, it wont happen.
>
> I'm against forced-collectivism, not voluntary relationships.
>
> > The race to the Moon required big money. And what
> > did we get from it?
>
> What should "we" have gotten from something that wasnt profitable and that
> people were forced into slavery to pay for?
>
> That's what happens when forced-collectivist whims outweight individual
> rights. Single moms get forced to give up milk and egg money for trips to
> the moon, to satisfy the frivolous whims of the commissars who think they
> know best what to spend our hard earned money on.
>
> > What don't you dump NASA and the War on Drugs to save some money for
> > practical projects?
>
> I'd dump it all, make a Constitution that wouldnt allow government to
> initiate force against the people, and make all government voluntarily
> supported. Let people keep the money they work so hard to earn, and only
> support the amount of government THEY want to have. Anything more doesnt
> deserve to exist.

I think you got your Utopia already... It's called Somalia.

You don't worry about taxes or anything. The warlords run the show and
you could be one.

"His Highness the TibetanMonkey & the Free Spirits of the Jungle"
> wrote :

> On Nov 22, 9:38*pm, "Jane_Galt" > wrote:
>> "His Highness the TibetanMonkey & the Free Spirits of the Jungle"
>> > *wrote :
>>
>> > I know it's hard to get something done in this day and age in the
>> > United Selfish of America,
>>
>> Profit motive motivates people, while commies like you call it
"selfish".
>>
>> It's really just the drive to get the most value for what we produce by
>> spending our lives doing things. But that assumes that we own our lives
a
> nd
>> deserve to be paid for what we spend them to produce.
>>
>> In your world, the colective would own our lives.
>>
>> "Give us your paychecks and we'll spend most of it and give you back
what
>> we think you need."
>>
>> > but even the highway system required
>> > collective effort.
>>
>> Government, like other human relationships, should be voluntary. If
peopl
> e
>> want the government to make highways for them, they will contribute. If
>> not, it wont happen.
>>
>> I'm against forced-collectivism, not voluntary relationships.
>>
>> > The race to the Moon required big money. And what
>> > did we get from it?
>>
>> What should "we" have gotten from something that wasnt profitable and
tha
> t
>> people were forced into slavery to pay for?
>>
>> That's what happens when forced-collectivist whims outweight individual
>> rights. Single moms get forced to give up milk and egg money for trips
to
>> the moon, to satisfy the frivolous whims of the commissars who think
they
>> know best what to spend our hard earned money on.
>>
>> > What don't you dump NASA and the War on Drugs to save some money for
>> > practical projects?
>>
>> I'd dump it all, make a Constitution that wouldnt allow government to
>> initiate force against the people, and make all government voluntarily
>> supported. Let people keep the money they work so hard to earn, and only
>> support the amount of government THEY want to have. Anything more doesnt
>> deserve to exist.
>
> I think you got your Utopia already... It's called Somalia.

Ok, so now you're proving that you cant comprehend the difference between
essential voluntary government, and anarchy. I see.

> You don't worry about taxes or anything. The warlords run the show and
> you could be one.

Yep. Kook.


--
- Jane Galt

By taxing, borrowing and wasting money that the tax slaves must be forced
to pay back, Government does NOT "create jobs", it NEVER HAS. It actually
consumes and destroys the wealth that the private sector, which really DOES
create jobs, could be using to do so!

"Jane_Galt" > wrote in message
7.142...
> "His Highness the TibetanMonkey & the Free Spirits of the Jungle"
> > wrote :
>
>> On Nov 22, 9:38 pm, "Jane_Galt" > wrote:
>>> "His Highness the TibetanMonkey & the Free Spirits of the Jungle"
>>> > wrote :
>>>
>>> > I know it's hard to get something done in this day and age in the
>>> > United Selfish of America,
>>>
>>> Profit motive motivates people, while commies like you call it
> "selfish".
>>>
>>> It's really just the drive to get the most value for what we produce by
>>> spending our lives doing things. But that assumes that we own our lives
> a
>> nd
>>> deserve to be paid for what we spend them to produce.
>>>
>>> In your world, the colective would own our lives.
>>>
>>> "Give us your paychecks and we'll spend most of it and give you back
> what
>>> we think you need."
>>>
>>> > but even the highway system required
>>> > collective effort.
>>>
>>> Government, like other human relationships, should be voluntary. If
> peopl
>> e
>>> want the government to make highways for them, they will contribute. If
>>> not, it wont happen.
>>>
>>> I'm against forced-collectivism, not voluntary relationships.
>>>
>>> > The race to the Moon required big money. And what
>>> > did we get from it?
>>>
>>> What should "we" have gotten from something that wasnt profitable and
> tha
>> t
>>> people were forced into slavery to pay for?
>>>
>>> That's what happens when forced-collectivist whims outweight individual
>>> rights. Single moms get forced to give up milk and egg money for trips
> to
>>> the moon, to satisfy the frivolous whims of the commissars who think
> they
>>> know best what to spend our hard earned money on.
>>>
>>> > What don't you dump NASA and the War on Drugs to save some money for
>>> > practical projects?
>>>
>>> I'd dump it all, make a Constitution that wouldnt allow government to
>>> initiate force against the people, and make all government voluntarily
>>> supported. Let people keep the money they work so hard to earn, and only
>>> support the amount of government THEY want to have. Anything more doesnt
>>> deserve to exist.
>>
>> I think you got your Utopia already... It's called Somalia.
>
> Ok, so now you're proving that you cant comprehend the difference between
> essential voluntary government, and anarchy. I see.
>
>> You don't worry about taxes or anything. The warlords run the show and
>> you could be one.
>
> Yep. Kook.
>
>
You've got Siberian Monkey Stretcher nailed. Me, I don't even bother
replying to his stupid Soros-initiated rants. I just do what we used to do
in the old neighborhood. Click one's thumb off one's teeth and otherwise
ignore his childish rants.

Charles Grozny



> --
> - Jane Galt
>
> By taxing, borrowing and wasting money that the tax slaves must be forced
> to pay back, Government does NOT "create jobs", it NEVER HAS. It actually
> consumes and destroys the wealth that the private sector, which really
> DOES
> create jobs, could be using to do so!

On Nov 23, 1:15*am, "Jane_Galt" > wrote:
> "His Highness the TibetanMonkey & the Free Spirits of the Jungle"
> > *wrote :
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Nov 22, 9:38 pm, "Jane_Galt" > wrote:
> >> "His Highness the TibetanMonkey & the Free Spirits of the Jungle"
> >> > wrote :
>
> >> > I know it's hard to get something done in this day and age in the
> >> > United Selfish of America,
>
> >> Profit motive motivates people, while commies like you call it
> "selfish".
>
> >> It's really just the drive to get the most value for what we produce by
> >> spending our lives doing things. But that assumes that we own our lives
> a
> > nd
> >> deserve to be paid for what we spend them to produce.
>
> >> In your world, the colective would own our lives.
>
> >> "Give us your paychecks and we'll spend most of it and give you back
> what
> >> we think you need."
>
> >> > but even the highway system required
> >> > collective effort.
>
> >> Government, like other human relationships, should be voluntary. If
> peopl
> > e
> >> want the government to make highways for them, they will contribute. If
> >> not, it wont happen.
>
> >> I'm against forced-collectivism, not voluntary relationships.
>
> >> > The race to the Moon required big money. And what
> >> > did we get from it?
>
> >> What should "we" have gotten from something that wasnt profitable and
> tha
> > t
> >> people were forced into slavery to pay for?
>
> >> That's what happens when forced-collectivist whims outweight individual
> >> rights. Single moms get forced to give up milk and egg money for trips
> to
> >> the moon, to satisfy the frivolous whims of the commissars who think
> they
> >> know best what to spend our hard earned money on.
>
> >> > What don't you dump NASA and the War on Drugs to save some money for
> >> > practical projects?
>
> >> I'd dump it all, make a Constitution that wouldnt allow government to
> >> initiate force against the people, and make all government voluntarily
> >> supported. Let people keep the money they work so hard to earn, and only
> >> support the amount of government THEY want to have. Anything more doesnt
> >> deserve to exist.
>
> > I think you got your Utopia already... It's called Somalia.
>
> Ok, so now you're proving that you cant comprehend the difference between
> essential voluntary government, and anarchy. I see.

Where do you find "voluntary government" that works? I mean it's a
nice Utopia, but people seek their own selfish interest as you know
from your selfish philosophy.

On Nov 23, 9:06*am, "CharlesGrozny" > wrote:
> "Jane_Galt" > wrote in message
>
> 7.142...
>
> > "His Highness the TibetanMonkey & the Free Spirits of the Jungle"
> > > *wrote :
>
> >> On Nov 22, 9:38 pm, "Jane_Galt" > wrote:
> >>> "His Highness the TibetanMonkey & the Free Spirits of the Jungle"
> >>> > *wrote :
>
> >>> > I know it's hard to get something done in this day and age in the
> >>> > United Selfish of America,
>
> >>> Profit motive motivates people, while commies like you call it
> > "selfish".
>
> >>> It's really just the drive to get the most value for what we produce by
> >>> spending our lives doing things. But that assumes that we own our lives
> > a
> >> nd
> >>> deserve to be paid for what we spend them to produce.
>
> >>> In your world, the colective would own our lives.
>
> >>> "Give us your paychecks and we'll spend most of it and give you back
> > what
> >>> we think you need."
>
> >>> > but even the highway system required
> >>> > collective effort.
>
> >>> Government, like other human relationships, should be voluntary. If
> > peopl
> >> e
> >>> want the government to make highways for them, they will contribute. If
> >>> not, it wont happen.
>
> >>> I'm against forced-collectivism, not voluntary relationships.
>
> >>> > The race to the Moon required big money. And what
> >>> > did we get from it?
>
> >>> What should "we" have gotten from something that wasnt profitable and
> > tha
> >> t
> >>> people were forced into slavery to pay for?
>
> >>> That's what happens when forced-collectivist whims outweight individual
> >>> rights. Single moms get forced to give up milk and egg money for trips
> > to
> >>> the moon, to satisfy the frivolous whims of the commissars who think
> > they
> >>> know best what to spend our hard earned money on.
>
> >>> > What don't you dump NASA and the War on Drugs to save some money for
> >>> > practical projects?
>
> >>> I'd dump it all, make a Constitution that wouldnt allow government to
> >>> initiate force against the people, and make all government voluntarily
> >>> supported. Let people keep the money they work so hard to earn, and only
> >>> support the amount of government THEY want to have. Anything more doesnt
> >>> deserve to exist.
>
> >> I think you got your Utopia already... It's called Somalia.
>
> > Ok, so now you're proving that you cant comprehend the difference between
> > essential voluntary government, and anarchy. I see.
>
> >> You don't worry about taxes or anything. The warlords run the show and
> >> you could be one.
>
> > Yep. Kook.
>
> You've got Siberian Monkey Stretcher nailed. *Me, I don't even bother
> replying to his stupid Soros-initiated rants. *I just do what we used to do
> in the old neighborhood. *Click one's thumb off one's teeth and otherwise
> ignore his childish rants.

He ain't got a hair of me. All the crap he's thrown at me, went back
to him twice.

I just wished this Ayna Randya was alive to argue with her so she
could be dismissed forever. Is she Russian or something? Here's a nice
Russian philosopher and prince, not some scum...

“America is just the country that shows how all the written guarantees
in the world for freedom are no protection against tyranny and
oppression of the worst kind. There the politician has come to be
looked upon as the very scum of society.” --Prince Kropotkin

On Tue, 23 Nov 2010 00:15:17 -0600, "Jane_Galt"
> wrote:

>"His Highness the TibetanMonkey & the Free Spirits of the Jungle"
> wrote :
>
>> On Nov 22, 9:38*pm, "Jane_Galt" > wrote:
>>> "His Highness the TibetanMonkey & the Free Spirits of the Jungle"
>>> > *wrote :
>>>
>>> > I know it's hard to get something done in this day and age in the
>>> > United Selfish of America,
>>>
>>> Profit motive motivates people, while commies like you call it
>"selfish".
>>>
>>> It's really just the drive to get the most value for what we produce by
>>> spending our lives doing things. But that assumes that we own our lives
>a
>> nd
>>> deserve to be paid for what we spend them to produce.
>>>
>>> In your world, the colective would own our lives.
>>>
>>> "Give us your paychecks and we'll spend most of it and give you back
>what
>>> we think you need."
>>>
>>> > but even the highway system required
>>> > collective effort.
>>>
>>> Government, like other human relationships, should be voluntary. If
>peopl
>> e
>>> want the government to make highways for them, they will contribute. If
>>> not, it wont happen.
>>>
>>> I'm against forced-collectivism, not voluntary relationships.
>>>
>>> > The race to the Moon required big money. And what
>>> > did we get from it?
>>>
>>> What should "we" have gotten from something that wasnt profitable and
>tha
>> t
>>> people were forced into slavery to pay for?
>>>
>>> That's what happens when forced-collectivist whims outweight individual
>>> rights. Single moms get forced to give up milk and egg money for trips
>to
>>> the moon, to satisfy the frivolous whims of the commissars who think
>they
>>> know best what to spend our hard earned money on.
>>>
>>> > What don't you dump NASA and the War on Drugs to save some money for
>>> > practical projects?
>>>
>>> I'd dump it all, make a Constitution that wouldnt allow government to
>>> initiate force against the people, and make all government voluntarily
>>> supported. Let people keep the money they work so hard to earn, and only
>>> support the amount of government THEY want to have. Anything more doesnt
>>> deserve to exist.
>>
>> I think you got your Utopia already... It's called Somalia.
>
>Ok, so now you're proving that you cant comprehend the difference between
>essential voluntary government, and anarchy. I see.

Just to show how muddled and confused your thinking is, you are trying
to tell us that something can be "essential" and "voluntary" at the
same time.
>
>> You don't worry about taxes or anything. The warlords run the show and
>> you could be one.
>
>Yep. Kook.

Nah. Experience Usenet denizen. Most of the "liberarians" that show
up here are just fascists wearing a new coat of paint.

On Nov 23, 10:34*am, "5791 Dead, 934 since 1/20/09" <dead@dead> wrote:
> On Tue, 23 Nov 2010 00:15:17 -0600, "Jane_Galt"
>
>
>
> > wrote:
> >"His Highness the TibetanMonkey & the Free Spirits of the Jungle"
> > *wrote :
>
> >> On Nov 22, 9:38*pm, "Jane_Galt" > wrote:
> >>> "His Highness the TibetanMonkey & the Free Spirits of the Jungle"
> >>> > *wrote :
>
> >>> > I know it's hard to get something done in this day and age in the
> >>> > United Selfish of America,
>
> >>> Profit motive motivates people, while commies like you call it
> >"selfish".
>
> >>> It's really just the drive to get the most value for what we produce by
> >>> spending our lives doing things. But that assumes that we own our lives
> >a
> >> nd
> >>> deserve to be paid for what we spend them to produce.
>
> >>> In your world, the colective would own our lives.
>
> >>> "Give us your paychecks and we'll spend most of it and give you back
> >what
> >>> we think you need."
>
> >>> > but even the highway system required
> >>> > collective effort.
>
> >>> Government, like other human relationships, should be voluntary. If
> >peopl
> >> e
> >>> want the government to make highways for them, they will contribute. If
> >>> not, it wont happen.
>
> >>> I'm against forced-collectivism, not voluntary relationships.
>
> >>> > The race to the Moon required big money. And what
> >>> > did we get from it?
>
> >>> What should "we" have gotten from something that wasnt profitable and
> >tha
> >> t
> >>> people were forced into slavery to pay for?
>
> >>> That's what happens when forced-collectivist whims outweight individual
> >>> rights. Single moms get forced to give up milk and egg money for trips
> >to
> >>> the moon, to satisfy the frivolous whims of the commissars who think
> >they
> >>> know best what to spend our hard earned money on.
>
> >>> > What don't you dump NASA and the War on Drugs to save some money for
> >>> > practical projects?
>
> >>> I'd dump it all, make a Constitution that wouldnt allow government to
> >>> initiate force against the people, and make all government voluntarily
> >>> supported. Let people keep the money they work so hard to earn, and only
> >>> support the amount of government THEY want to have. Anything more doesnt
> >>> deserve to exist.
>
> >> I think you got your Utopia already... It's called Somalia.
>
> >Ok, so now you're proving that you cant comprehend the difference between
> >essential voluntary government, and anarchy. I see.
>
> Just to show how muddled and confused your thinking is, you are trying
> to tell us that something can be "essential" and "voluntary" at the
> same time.
>
>
>
> >> You don't worry about taxes or anything. The warlords run the show and
> >> you could be one.
>
> >Yep. Kook.
>
> Nah. *Experience Usenet denizen. *Most of the "liberarians" that show
> up here are just fascists wearing a new coat of paint.

"Voluntary fascists," that is.

On Tue, 23 Nov 2010 07:34:32 -0800, "5791 Dead, 934 since 1/20/09"
<dead@dead> wrote:

>On Tue, 23 Nov 2010 00:15:17 -0600, "Jane_Galt"
> wrote:
>
>>"His Highness the TibetanMonkey & the Free Spirits of the Jungle"
> wrote :
>>
>>> On Nov 22, 9:38*pm, "Jane_Galt" > wrote:
>>>> "His Highness the TibetanMonkey & the Free Spirits of the Jungle"
>>>> > *wrote :
>>>>
>>>> > I know it's hard to get something done in this day and age in the
>>>> > United Selfish of America,
>>>>
>>>> Profit motive motivates people, while commies like you call it
>>"selfish".
>>>>
>>>> It's really just the drive to get the most value for what we produce by
>>>> spending our lives doing things. But that assumes that we own our lives
>>a
>>> nd
>>>> deserve to be paid for what we spend them to produce.
>>>>
>>>> In your world, the colective would own our lives.
>>>>
>>>> "Give us your paychecks and we'll spend most of it and give you back
>>what
>>>> we think you need."
>>>>
>>>> > but even the highway system required
>>>> > collective effort.
>>>>
>>>> Government, like other human relationships, should be voluntary. If
>>peopl
>>> e
>>>> want the government to make highways for them, they will contribute. If
>>>> not, it wont happen.
>>>>
>>>> I'm against forced-collectivism, not voluntary relationships.
>>>>
>>>> > The race to the Moon required big money. And what
>>>> > did we get from it?
>>>>
>>>> What should "we" have gotten from something that wasnt profitable and
>>tha
>>> t
>>>> people were forced into slavery to pay for?
>>>>
>>>> That's what happens when forced-collectivist whims outweight individual
>>>> rights. Single moms get forced to give up milk and egg money for trips
>>to
>>>> the moon, to satisfy the frivolous whims of the commissars who think
>>they
>>>> know best what to spend our hard earned money on.
>>>>
>>>> > What don't you dump NASA and the War on Drugs to save some money for
>>>> > practical projects?
>>>>
>>>> I'd dump it all, make a Constitution that wouldnt allow government to
>>>> initiate force against the people, and make all government voluntarily
>>>> supported. Let people keep the money they work so hard to earn, and only
>>>> support the amount of government THEY want to have. Anything more doesnt
>>>> deserve to exist.
>>>
>>> I think you got your Utopia already... It's called Somalia.
>>
>>Ok, so now you're proving that you cant comprehend the difference between
>>essential voluntary government, and anarchy. I see.
>
>Just to show how muddled and confused your thinking is, you are trying
>to tell us that something can be "essential" and "voluntary" at the
>same time.
>>
>>> You don't worry about taxes or anything. The warlords run the show and
>>> you could be one.
>>
>>Yep. Kook.
>
>Nah. Experience Usenet denizen. Most of the "liberarians" that show
>up here are just fascists wearing a new coat of paint.

Jamieson hates libertarians because libertarians believe in making
losers like Jamieson take care of themselves

--

The leftists' concept of "freedom" involves living
forever as a child in the loving arms of benevolent,
caring mother government who will supply them with
all the needs she thinks they should have and will also
insure that everything they say and do will comply
exactly with her plan for them.