"jak163" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 19 Nov 2004 19:37:25 GMT, "Michael McKelvy"
wrote:

Either people have the right to property and the ability to transfer it or
they don't. If they do, the government has no claim on it. If they don't
you have no right to anything unless the government says so.

Nope these are two abstract positions between which there is an ocean
of territory.

Only for subjectivists. Let me put it this way, humans must have rights in
order to thrive. One of the essential, probably the most essential right is
the right to property, since most other rights are connected to it. If one
ahs a right to private property, that means it's his, not shared unless by
free will.

Cerainly not confiscated by legilative fiat.

If the Left is so concerned about saving the Family farmer, they'd oppose
the death tax.
If they cared about the small businessman they'd oppose the death tax.
If they cared about minority owned businsesses prosepering, they'd oppose
the death tax.
If they cared about fairness they'd oppose the dath tax. Taxing one's
income while they are alive is bad enough, taxing it after they're dead is
flat out unfair.
It's the leading cause of small businesses being disolved.

This piece of **** was supposed to be a temporary emergency measure to raise
funds for war related events. We don't need it now, we didn't need it then.

Saying it's to keep the playing field level or whatever the talking points
this week are is bull****.


The U.S. today is somewhere in between.

Between stealing a little and stealing a lot.